We performed a comparison between Bitbucket Server and Liquibase based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, GitHub, Git and others in Version Control."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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is server management."
"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."
"It is an easily scalable solution."
"Bitbucket Server easily integrates with Jira because they are both Atlassian products."
"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."
"I believe it's user-friendly for our developers, and it's effective in terms of traceability for tracking our actions."
"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."
"Bitbucket Server can experience performance issues when pushing a large amount of code. This process may take a considerable amount of time."
"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."
"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."
"The solution's user interface could be improved because it's not very user-friendly or intuitive."
"Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available."
"Instead of providing only raw features and plugins, Atlassian should provide a ready-to-use integration of both choices to incorporate "trunk-based" development."
"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 product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."
"The pricing is quite high."
Earn 20 points
Bitbucket Server is ranked 2nd in Version Control with 17 reviews while Liquibase is ranked 7th in Version Control. Bitbucket Server is rated 8.4, while Liquibase is rated 10.0. 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 "A unique product that is easy to implement, with great automation capabilities ". 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 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.
