Bitbucket Server Reviews

I lead a testing team for a company, and all my QAs use Bitbucket Server to store their automation testing code.

Bitbucket Server easily integrates with Jira because they are both Atlassian products. The solution's integration with Jenkins is also easy.

The solution's user interface could be improved because it's not very user-friendly or intuitive. It feels like old HTML blocks were used to build the user interface.

Some supporting documentation for Bitbucket Server would be helpful because it's not very easy to get information about it. I remember having to Google a few times to figure out how to do something on Bitbucket Server.

I have been using Bitbucket Server for two years.

I haven’t faced any issues with the solution’s stability.

I rate Bitbucket Server ten out of ten for stability.

We've been only using the solution as a repository, and we haven't faced any challenges with its scalability.

I rate Bitbucket Server a six out of ten for scalability.

The solution's technical support is not good. They pick keywords from the customer's email and send some automated standard responses that have been copypasted, which doesn't help.

Negative

Bitbucket Server is quite expensive compared to other products. We pay a monthly licensing fee for the solution.

I am open to exploring other products because while Bitbucket Server does the job, there are better tools in the market that I need to explore.

Overall, I rate Bitbucket Server a five out of ten.

Bitbucket Server I use for a software repository that has code inside.

Bitbucket Server is easy to use. You can use other applications to access it, or you can use it to access the internet. You can use solutions, such as Sourcetree, which is free, and put it on your development system and use it to do the check-in, checkouts, and those type of operations. It is nice, but some other developers may agree.

I have been Bitbucket Server for approximately two and a half years.

Bitbucket Server is stable.

Bitbucket Server is scalable because the developers are putting things in it they're not supposed to, such as binary data, and it's more or less a text code repository.

We have approximately 150 user licenses. Sometimes vendors will have licenses in chunks. For example, from 50 to 150 or 200. There's no in-between, sometimes you have to buy more licenses than you need.

I have not needed to use technical support. I am good with using this solution and can figure out problems myself or I can use the internet and find a solution.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I can do the integration and setup of the solution. There requires one person to do the maintenance of the solution. The solution is low maintenance. If a patch comes out, and it affects you then you need to do something. If it does not, then you do not need to do anything.

There is a cost to use this solution but it is based on how many users are using it. If you have 50 users or 1,000 users the price will be very different.

Bitbucket Server can be expensive and they want you to purchase their cloud solution. They are getting rid of their on-premises solution, however, you can still find them.

Atlassian tools seem to use Log4j quite a bit, and they should get away from it because of the recent security issues that have happened in the last few days.

I rate Bitbucket Server a six out of ten.

I do a lot of data acquisitions. I establish several contacts and get accounts generated on our clusters so that our researchers can process the data.

We use Bitbucket to get flows for our pipeline management. We outline the scripts that we write to keep them in there for version control.

The most valuable feature of this solution is server management. 

There are other solutions that do that, but this is a solution that the global IT department has available for everyone across the organization.

It would be useful if we were able to work and manage other tickets; for example, if I were to use Jira, Confluence, or Bitbucket, all from a command-line standpoint, in addition to the web interface, it would be incredibly helpful.

I know that there are tools, packages, and different plugins that I can use to collaborate from a command-line standpoint, or through other tools, but putting the functionality into a new version would definitely help.

Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available.

I have been using this solution for three, four, maybe five years.

We use a few different versions, but they are all older.

It's a stable solution, but there are times where it's indexing, and if it happens during the time that I am using it, then it's not very stable. We have been using it for years, so there is a lot of data.

It's scalable. The newer cloud versions of the tools may or may not alleviate the issues with stability, which is a problem with the version that I have.

I have not contacted technical support.

They have a community. If anybody has a question they will be willing to help and blog posts.

Anybody can look at to learn more about their products and how to use the different solutions that they have.

A lot of what they have is for the new versions, which are cloud-based. For example, they are actively working on different plugins.

We use Amazon and Google Cloud storage solutions. Also, AWS buckets, GCP buckets, and Kubernetes, but it depends on what's in the contract and available for the researcher, for both internal and external applications.

I was not a part of the initial setup.

I am not familiar with how it is set up. It was done through our global team and made available for the company.

I am not aware of the pricing.

If anybody was considering this tool, I would be expecting that they would really evaluate it and know what the functionalities are ahead of time.

There are other tools that are similar, so make sure to look at everything available in that space and make sure it fits their needs.

I would rate Bitbuck Server an eight out of ten.

The product’s most valuable features are private repositories and the ability to work as a proxy for implementing CI/CD pipelines.

The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users. They could make it easier to access and introduce templates with sample code for beginners to understand Kubernetes deployment.

We have been using Bitbucket Server for eight years.

It is a perfectly stable platform.

We have 37,000 Bitbucket Server users in our organization. We plan to increase the usage.

We use Jira and Confluence.

The initial setup is simple for me as I am an experienced developer. For our private cloud setup, the process was streamlined, given the enterprise-level support and production coverage.

Bitbucket significantly improves our code review and collaboration processes by providing private repositories as a default feature. This specific feature was not available in GitHub at the time of our selection. 

We utilize a standard Gitflow with feature branches, including branches like bugfixes, hotfixes, and more. It makes the request mechanism easy to use.

Its integration capabilities with other tools have been useful. However, the integration with Slack needs improvement. It provides satisfactory performance and scalability for our site.

I recommend it to others and rate it a nine out of ten.

I use Bitbucket Server to store code. 

The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy. 

Bitbucket Server has limited user support for its free version. It is expensive. 

I have been using the product for two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

Bitbucket Server is scalable. 

I have worked with GitHub and GitLab. 

The tool's deployment is straightforward. 

Bitbucket Server's deployment can be done in-house. 

Bitbucket Server saves a lot of money. 

I rate Bitbucket Server a nine out of ten. 

Horizontal scalability & high availability are the most important features that we are looking forward to from the Stash DC. With respect to the premier support, timely response and the fact that we have assigned representatives is great.

The premier support has helped Cisco in mitigating risk and reducing cost.

Will let you know in a couple months. Still in the process of evaluating the product.

We use Stash Data Center and Premier Support. We have been using it since January 12, 2015.

None, so far.

Testing under progress.

In production, we still have the single instance of the product and it has scaled pretty well and no major issues reported thus far.

Very good but I have some feedback with respect to the support.

1) Currently, we have a limitation of 3 resources for interacting with Atlassian support. It would be nice to increase it to 5-10 because we have to internally depend upon identified users to communicate to the Atlassian. Or else, have this support aligned to the Cisco mailer alias so that multiple users within Cisco will be notified and can use the same user name to raise support requests with Atlassian.

Very good but would be good to have a user interface in Atlassian.com to manage the users at our end instead of having to communicate each time to the premier support to manage users.

We are still using SVN but we moving toward git because of the flexibility it provides.

Nope, our engineering wing had done some analysis and they suggested Stash. Hence, we directly jumped in.

If folks out there are looking to move to a more agile approach for development, Agile Jira + Bamboo + Stash DC will definitely be a great way to go since these systems seamlessly integrate with each other. Premier support is definitely recommended.

A direct single contact to Atlassian for needed functionality who can provide Roadmap information and be a voice for our company at Atlassian.

He helped gather information about how Stash works so that we could make an educated decision on how to handle system administration support – including items like backups, how easiest to grow adoption with limited support staff, and how to consider future integrations between Atlassian tools and our internal tools.

More input/visibility to what features are important to other Enterprise customers (without providing enough details to determine who the enterprise customer is). Being able to react if a certain feature is of extreme importance and work to bring more light to that request at Atlassian. i.e. we saw a feature that had been heavily requested by customers that was very important to us and having a TAM didn’t get us much traction on getting this feature.

We purchased a Technical Account Management (TAM) in July 2014. 

Our TAM was able to help us when we had issues with deployment. 

Our TAM was able to help us with stability issues. 

No issues with scalability that our TAM was able to solve. 

Yes – We haven’t switched completely but it is starting to gain more traction than other solutions like Gerrit. We have also been using and will continue to use Rally with our JIRA instances.

Straightforward in most ways – install, configuration. Some parts were more complex – SSL, LDAP groups pulled in to manage security in a low maintenance way.

Yes many – GitLab, Gitolite, GitHub, git. Gerrit. We have also been using Clarity, Rally on the ALM side.

Are you looking for someone who can help your strategy for deploying one or more Atlassian products, then I would go with TAM. If you need more support for running the Atlassian products (issues, outages, performance), then Premier Support is the route to go.

I use the solution in my company for traditional projects. Now, my company plans to move our projects to GitLab since it provides a single UI for everything.

Bitbucket Server creates a branch and is useful for authentication, commits, and pushing changes.

Bitbucket Server is a standalone tool or server. My company also uses Jira. In our company, there are different kinds of tools linked together by webhooks, and we use Jenkins to run Bitbucket Server. GitLab provides an integrated solution, so everything is available in a single product. With Bitbucket Server, you can see the codes, configure the pipelines, and you can merge a pull request. Bitbucket Server may be even better than GitHub. With GitLab, you have a single solution in one place, so it is not scattered in many places, like in the case of Jira, Jenkins, or Bitbucket Server, making it a better option for our company. From an improvement perspective, Bitbucket Server should make everything available as a single solution.

I have experience with Bitbucket Server.

In our company, Bitbucket Server has a backend link to Jira. When Jira is down, Bitbucket Server is also down.

It is an okay tool in terms of scalability. Though I am unsure, I feel that Oracle DB is used in the backend. In our company, when we have to create new reports in the backend database, you just increase the hard disk. Another team in my company controls the aforementioned area associated with the product, so I don't know it in detail.

Considering that all the developers in my company use the product, I would say that around 30 percent of the people in my company use the solution.

My company decided that since Zscaler is on the cloud, we need a local on-premises server.

The product's initial setup phase is complex. GitLab is better to deal with when it comes to the setup phase since it uses the YAML script. With GitLab, one can use templates for almost all projects, so a given project can be dealt with based on the templates, and sometimes the templates might have to be updated a little bit. In Jenkins, every project is treated separately, so you have to create every project on Jenkinsfile. It cannot be based on some templates, and I feel it may be a little bit complex and not as easy as GitLab.

One needs to pay towards the licensing charges associated with the product.

I am planning to move to GitLab.

In terms of the most valuable feature of the tool for our company's current collaboration, I would say that since the product is deployed on an on-premises model, you can easily control the branching strategy, merge strategies, and code review.

The pull request feature of the tool streamlines the code review process in our company, after which we invite some people to review it and then change the policies if needed. All people involved in the process of reviewing should provide approval based on which the company can delete or merge branches.

For the improvement of CI/CD pipelines, my company uses Jenkins to check the pipelines from the Bitbucket Server. In the pipeline, our company can link to Jira or Confluence and deal with checkout, clone, compile, and then do the test and generate reports.

I recommend the product to others, especially small companies because you can get a cloud solution for your organization, and also, it is similar to GitLab and GitHub. One can work with Bitbucket Server, Jira, and GitLab, along with CI/CD pipelines. Small companies also need not set up on-premises servers and should prefer cloud services.

In terms of benefits, I feel that many companies are moving to Bitbucket Server since it can be deployed on an on-premises model at a time when everything is being moved to the cloud. GitLab can be used by those who want to move to the cloud.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.