We performed a comparison between Bitbucket Server and Liquibase 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."It is an amazingly stable solution."
"The initial setup is straightforward. It takes half an hour to deploy."
"The product’s most valuable features are private repositories and the ability to work as a proxy for implementing CI/CD pipelines."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is server management."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"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."
"Our code is secure."
"It will be useful for teams to automate and reduce manual work."
"They have some nice features around the automation of rule checking. They have a rules engine that checks the SQL code so that you can actually do your edit checks on the validity of the SQL code. If you don't want certain tables to be able to have certain things done to them, you can have it checked for that. It's a very flexible way to kind of do an automated peer review of the SQL code to catch things before you actually try to deploy it."
"The solution is easy to use, and it has very clear documentation."
"If I want to mail someone a master branch, then sometimes it shows some conflict with other codes in the master branch."
"The tasks on Bitbucket must be automatically integrated into Jira."
"The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."
"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."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it's not very user-friendly or intuitive."
"The user experience is tedious and long-winded. It could also be smoother from an admin's perspective."
"The product's initial setup phase is complex."
"Bitbucket Server can experience performance issues when pushing a large amount of code. This process may take a considerable amount of time."
"One thing we faced issues with is that Liquibase does not show the exact error, which added to the complexity."
"The pricing is quite high."
"We were not able to delete some of the tables because of a security issue."
Earn 20 points
Bitbucket Server is ranked 2nd in Version Control with 21 reviews while Liquibase is ranked 7th in Version Control with 3 reviews. Bitbucket Server is rated 8.2, while Liquibase 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 Liquibase writes "Offers integration with multiple databases, stable product and reduced our manual intervention". Bitbucket Server is most compared with Bitbucket, Atlassian SourceTree, AWS CodeCommit and GitHub, whereas Liquibase is most compared with Bitbucket, Git and DBmaestro Database Source Control. See our Bitbucket Server vs. Liquibase 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.
