We performed a comparison between Atlassian SourceTree and GitHub based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Version Control solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup is straightforward."
"The interface is very good and is easy to use. It tells you when you've committed, when you've uploaded, and gives you the differences."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to fix a broken repository merge."
"The solution's initial setup process is straightforward."
"The learning curve is small."
"The deployment is fast since we just have to run the script, and once it's done, it takes a few minutes."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the version control field."
"The versioning of the code and the tracking of changes are definitely some of my top features."
"The most valuable features are GitHub are the standard features, they are very useful."
"It has a lot of features from the code development perspective. You get a lot of features such as repo, commit, merge, and branch. You can play around and do things on the fly. It is easy and simple to deploy. It is also easier to use when working from home."
"Our code is secure."
"GitHub allows us the option to push files from a non-UA method or directly upload files from the UA. You can integrate GitHub with Jenkins to do CI/CD."
"The product's UI needs improvement."
"For everyday use, I am more comfortable using the command line interface, rather than using SourceTree."
"Its interface could be easy to understand for a programmer."
"I have had a food experience with Atlassian SourceTree but it might not be for everyone."
"The project management sector really needs some improvement for GitHub. I don't know if GitHub made sense for me as a project manager."
"The GitHub repository needs an upgraded user interface and overall UI improvements."
"The security point should be addressed in the next release and scaling is also an issue."
"It is currently only from the development perspective. It doesn't have features related to project management and testing. It is not like Azure. So, there is a lot of room for improvement. It is a version control product, and it would be good if they can come up with a complete DevOps product."
"I decided not to use GitHub but developed my tool because I found it more efficient. I'm familiar with my tools, making them easier to use. I like being able to customize them to fit my workflow and the way I think.. Software development is like a personal workshop, and I tailor my version control to match my approach."
"Though I haven't done much research, GitHub lacks in providing more functions like GitLab."
"From the recruiting standpoint, I would like to see email IDs and phone numbers and a brief introduction about their profile."
"Our firewall was blocking cloning and downloading with SSH."
Atlassian SourceTree is ranked 6th in Version Control with 5 reviews while GitHub is ranked 3rd in Version Control with 74 reviews. Atlassian SourceTree is rated 7.2, while GitHub is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Atlassian SourceTree writes "An easy-to-setup solution, but its documentation could be better for technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitHub writes "Beneficial version control and continuous integration, but guides would be helpful". Atlassian SourceTree is most compared with Git, Bitbucket, Bitbucket Server and AWS CodeCommit, whereas GitHub is most compared with Snyk, AWS CodeCommit, Bitbucket, Fortify on Demand and Checkmarx One. See our Atlassian SourceTree vs. GitHub report.
See our list of best Version Control vendors.
We monitor all Version Control reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
