Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Bitbucket vs Gogs: What are the differences?
Introduction
Bitbucket and Gogs are both popular version control systems used by software development teams to manage their code repositories. While they have similarities in function, there are several key differences between the two platforms that set them apart. In this markdown, we will highlight six key differences between Bitbucket and Gogs.
User Interface and Design: Bitbucket offers a more modern and visually appealing user interface compared to Gogs. It provides a more user-friendly experience with its intuitive design, making it easier for users to navigate and perform actions.
Pricing and Licensing: Bitbucket offers both free and paid plans, allowing users with different needs to choose the right pricing option. Gogs, on the other hand, is an open-source platform that is completely free to use, making it a suitable choice for users looking for a cost-effective solution.
Collaboration Features: Bitbucket provides a range of collaboration features such as pull requests, inline commenting, and code review tools. These features make it easier for teams to collaborate and review code changes. Gogs, however, has limited collaboration features, making it more suitable for smaller teams or individual developers.
Integration Options: Bitbucket offers a wide range of integrations with other popular development tools such as Jira, Trello, and Slack. This enables seamless workflows and enhances productivity for development teams. Gogs, on the other hand, has fewer integration options, which may limit its capabilities when it comes to integrating with other tools.
Scalability and Performance: Bitbucket is known for its scalability and high performance, making it suitable for larger teams or projects with heavy code repositories. Gogs, although capable of handling smaller projects effectively, may struggle with scalability and performance when dealing with large codebases.
Community and Support: Bitbucket has a larger and more active community compared to Gogs. This translates to a wider range of resources, tutorials, and community-driven support for users. Gogs, being a relatively newer platform, has a smaller community and may offer limited resources for support and troubleshooting.
In Summary, Bitbucket offers a more visually appealing interface, flexible pricing options, robust collaboration features, extensive integration options, better scalability and performance, and a larger community for support compared to Gogs.
We are using a Bitbucket server, and due to migration efforts and new Atlassian community license changes, we need to move to a new self-hosted solution. The new data-center license for Atlassian, available in February, will be community provisioned (free). Along with that community license, other technologies will be coming with it (Crucible, Confluence, and Jira). Is there value in a paid-for license to get the GitHub Enterprise? Are the tools that come with it worth the cost?
I know it is about $20 per 10 seats, and we have about 300 users. Have other convertees to Microsoft's tools found it easy to do a migration? Is the toolset that much more beneficial to the free suite that one can get from Atlassian?
So far, free seems to be the winner, and the familiarization with Atlassian implementation and maintenance is understood. Going to GitHub, are there any distinct challenges to be found or any perks to be attained?
These are pretty competitive, and to recommend one over the other would require understanding your usage. Also, what other tools you use: for instance, what do you use for Issue-tracking, or for build pipelines. In your case, since you are already using Bitbucket, the question would be: do you have any current pain-points? And, on the other hand, do you already use Atlassian's JIRA, where you'd benefit from the tight integration? So, though I would not recommend one over the other just in general,. But, if Bitbucket fulfills your current use-cases, then there seems to be little motivation to move.
Hi, I need advice. In my project, we are using Bitbucket hosted on-prem, Jenkins, and Jira. Also, we have restrictions not to use any plugins for code review, code quality, code security, etc., with bitbucket. Now we want to migrate to AWS CodeCommit, which would mean that we can use, let's say, Amazon CodeGuru for code reviews and move to AWS CodeBuild and AWS CodePipeline for build automation in the future rather than using Jenkins.
Now I want advice on below.
- Is it a good idea to migrate from Bitbucket to AWS Codecommit?
- If we want to integrate Jira with AWS Codecommit, then how can we do this? If a developer makes any changes in Jira, then a build should be triggered automatically in AWS and create a Jira ticket if the build fails. So, how can we achieve this?
Hi Kavita. It would be useful to explain in a bit more detail the integration to Jira you would like to achieve. Some of the Jira plugins will work with any git repository, regardless if its github/bitbucket/gitlab.
Do you have a K8s cluster and you want to deploy some services to it? Gitlab Auto Devops is key to achieve this without breaking a sweat.
We deploy Go services to our K8S clusters with warp speed thanks to Gitlab and it's Auto Devops pipeline.
I haven't seen tooling like this in any other git cloud provider.
I first used BitBucket because it had private repo's, and it didn't disappoint me. Also with the smooth integration of Jira, the decision to use BitBucket as a full application maintenance service was as easy as 1, 2, 3.
I honestly love BitBucket, by the looks, by the UI, and the smooth integration with Tower.
Do you review your Pull/Merge Request before assigning Reviewers?
If you work in a team opening a Pull Request (or Merge Request) looks appropriate. However, have you ever thought about opening a Pull/Merge Request when working by yourself? Here's a checklist of things you can review in your own:
- Pick the correct target branch
- Make Drafts explicit
- Name things properly
- Ask help for tools
- Remove the noise
- Fetch necessary data
- Understand Mergeability
- Pass the message
- Add screenshots
- Be found in the future
- Comment inline in your changes
Read the blog post for more detailed explanation for each item :D
What else do you review before asking for code review?
One of the magic tricks git performs is the ability to rewrite log history. You can do it in many ways, but git rebase -i is the one I most use. With this command, It’s possible to switch commits order, remove a commit, squash two or more commits, or edit, for instance.
It’s particularly useful to run it before opening a pull request. It allows developers to “clean up” the mess and organize commits before submitting to review. If you follow the practice 3 and 4, then the list of commits should look very similar to a task list. It should reveal the rationale you had, telling the story of how you end up with that final code.