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."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."
"Bitbucket Server easily integrates with Jira because they are both Atlassian products."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"Its standout features are the seamless integration with various intelligent tools and its user-friendly nature."
"The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy."
"Integration of Bitbucket with JIRA & Bamboo is well done by Atlassian."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is server management."
"This solution is very easy to use which I like about it. The capacity to own artifacts and share them with others is another good feature. You don't have to write all your code from scratch, you can use available templates and alter the code according to your needs."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features are GitHub are the standard features, they are very useful."
"GitHub provides the SFH key to protect our passwords and connection."
"GitHub is pure or open-source; you can access it anywhere. You can have a lot of collateral information. You can make the changes and do the reviews from one place."
"The solution can scale."
"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 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 tasks on Bitbucket must be automatically integrated into Jira."
"Enhancing the real-time reflection of changes online is an area that could benefit from improvement."
"At the moment, there are not many details on how to proceed with the troubleshooting if one of the users faces an issue with the product."
"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."
"We opted for the on-premises solution, and while it's quite expensive, I believe there's room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it's not very user-friendly or intuitive."
"Bitbucket Server has limited user support for its free version. It is expensive."
"If something has to be moved into approvals, and if they don't approve it in a few hours, then they should move the approval request to some other user, or they should have a way to escalate it."
"From the recruiting standpoint, I would like to see email IDs and phone numbers and a brief introduction about their profile."
"As of now, if I would like to learn about GitHub or its features, I would have to look on YouTube. It would be nice if they were able to send out a newsletter with explanations of new features that they are offering and what features are available."
"I would want to see some form of code security scanning implemented."
"We would like this solution to have a more user-friendly interface."
"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."
"The descriptions within Github could be more user-friendly to show the trees of Gitflow."
"The GUI design is poor, so I exclusively use the CLI, which is much easier to use and understand. It would be great to see the GUI updated to be more user-friendly."
Bitbucket Server is ranked 2nd in Version Control with 17 reviews while GitHub is ranked 3rd in Version Control with 64 reviews. Bitbucket Server is rated 8.4, 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, Atlassian SourceTree, Bitbucket and SonarQube. 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.
