We performed a comparison between Bitbucket Server 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 product’s most valuable features are private repositories and the ability to work as a proxy for implementing CI/CD pipelines."
"It is an amazingly stable solution."
"Bitbucket Server supports code collaboration by providing commands developers can use to check in code. Through comments, developers can specify the purpose of the code check-in. Additionally, Bitbucket allows tagging of code for releases."
"Integration of Bitbucket with JIRA & Bamboo is well done by Atlassian."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is server management."
"The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy."
"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 believe it's user-friendly for our developers, and it's effective in terms of traceability for tracking our actions."
"The version control functionality for this solution has been most valuable, especially when managing projects with multiple versions."
"The best feature is the ability to track the history of all code changes, and it's easy to use. Additionally, as it's open source, anyone can use that feature resulting in distributed development. This opens the door to collaboration with different code and developer, feature, and master branches of development."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it can support you for most of the road map and it can automate some tasks which works really well with collaboration with the teams. They are really interested in how they organize the history of the code itself which is good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the version control field."
"The most valuable feature is help offered by the community for open-source projects."
"The deployment is fast since we just have to run the script, and once it's done, it takes a few minutes."
"The solution is scalable."
"I find GitHub very user friendly."
"If I want to mail someone a master branch, then sometimes it shows some conflict with other codes in the master branch."
"The product requires patching and version improvements. Some functions do not work properly when we move from one version to another. We need a technical improvement. Also, communicating with other Atlassian products becomes cumbersome when we move from one version to another. I want Bitbucket Server to include a dashboard similar to Jira's. Atlassian must also develop a tool to scan our complete base for vulnerabilities."
"It would have been better to use Bitbucket Server if it had something similar to the concept called GitHub Actions since it allows GitHub to provide seamless integration of CI/CD pipelines."
"The user experience is tedious and long-winded. It could also be smoother from an admin's perspective."
"Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available."
"Bitbucket Server can experience performance issues when pushing a large amount of code. This process may take a considerable amount of time."
"Enhancing the real-time reflection of changes online is an area that could benefit from improvement."
"The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."
"GitHub's issue management could be improved a little from an organization standpoint. It would be helpful to have the ability to organize a work board or a backlog more comprehensively. For organizations migrating to GitHub from arbitrary systems, it's a little bit of a headache to move on to that system."
"Scalability is an area with a shortcoming, because of which it has room for improvement."
"GitHub could improve by being more user-friendly."
"The initial setup and implementation could be easier, I had some difficulties with it at first but I don't have a development background."
"We face issues with synchronization while working with teams."
"Lacks sufficient support in terms of professional services that could be provided."
"It would be good if there were training materials for junior developers."
"The stability can be improved."
Bitbucket Server is ranked 2nd in Version Control with 21 reviews while GitHub is ranked 3rd in Version Control with 74 reviews. Bitbucket Server is rated 8.2, while GitHub is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Bitbucket Server writes "An easy to use solution that works as a code repository for developers and helps them merge changes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitHub writes "Beneficial version control and continuous integration, but guides would be helpful". Bitbucket Server is most compared with Bitbucket, Atlassian SourceTree and AWS CodeCommit, whereas GitHub is most compared with Snyk, AWS CodeCommit, Bitbucket, Fortify on Demand and Veracode. See our Bitbucket Server 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.
