Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

blog.bitbucket.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 292 posts

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#121

Post by ZoFreX »

krelian wrote: post #34
eblume wrote: post #5

I'm having trouble thinking of reasons why bitbucket is used so much less than github - or at least why it seems that way. It's looking pretty damn good to me right now!

As someone who mostly uses github to browse through source code, the experience in Github is much better. Their source browser is fast and the code is very readable. Now, I'm trying to see if the new bitbucket can compare but there is no Explore option on the homepage so I can't really check their source browser.

This was a big one for me switching to GitHub and it is massively improved with this new update.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#122

Post by nbaksalyar »

LordIllidan wrote: post #103
lee wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Github is just greedy. No, Github is a business. BitBucket is offering free private accounts as a loss leader, not out of the kindness of their hearts. This is their strategy for competing with GitHub. A $7/month subscription for private github repos is well worth it.

7$ a month for 5 private repos is not worth it all. I acknowledge that Github is a business but I am not about to pay a lot of money for hosting all my repositories, when I can do the same on Bitbucket for free. And when the team grows enough that I'd have to pay Bitbucket, I'll do so willingly.

How much repositories do you have?

I think Github's plans are comparable to Bitbucket - it's just the starting tier is a bit more pricey - and, honestly, $7 or $12/mo doesn't make that much difference.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#123

Post by gfosco »

LordIllidan wrote: post #103
lee wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Github is just greedy. No, Github is a business. BitBucket is offering free private accounts as a loss leader, not out of the kindness of their hearts. This is their strategy for competing with GitHub. A $7/month subscription for private github repos is well worth it.

7$ a month for 5 private repos is not worth it all. I acknowledge that Github is a business but I am not about to pay a lot of money for hosting all my repositories, when I can do the same on Bitbucket for free. And when the team grows enough that I'd have to pay Bitbucket, I'll do so willingly.

It's worth it to me.... I pay for 10 private repos, and GitHub is one of my favorite tools. I don't like free services.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#124

Post by wickedchicken »

A lot of people here are commenting on GitHub being 'overpriced' or 'greedy.' TPW did an interview a while ago that has insight into why their pricing structure is the way it is. It's a pretty interesting read:

http://mixergy.com/tom-preston-werner-github-interview/

(search for 'which metrics') to skip to the pricing part).

Money quote: "That’s like buying a car based on how much it weighs. It’s irrelevant."

I may be biased since GitHub does a lot to foster the developer community in my area (I nabbed a sweet contracting gig at one of their drinkups), but I'm perfectly happy with their pricing.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#126

Post by tensor »

axusgrad wrote: post #55
duiker101 wrote: post #30

I just found out that bitbucket has unlimited private repos. That's one HUGE point for them on Github.

It looks like the limits are by number of users, which seems fairer. But they will probably make less money. I thought most of the projects on github were <5 people.

Not necessarily.

1) People on github paid plans might switch. Thus github will make less and bitbucket more.

2) People who don't use github due to cost might sign up for paid bitbucket plans.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#127

Post by __alexs »

wickedchicken wrote: post #124

A lot of people here are commenting on GitHub being 'overpriced' or 'greedy.' TPW did an interview a while ago that has insight into why their pricing structure is the way it is. It's a pretty interesting read: http://mixergy.com/tom-preston-werner-github-interview/ (search for 'which metrics') to skip to the pricing part). Money quote: "That’s like buying a car based on how much it weighs. It’s irrelevant." I may be…

> Money quote: "That’s like buying a car based on how much it weighs. It’s irrelevant."

Car manufacturers are constantly going on about how the latest model weighs X% less than last years. Lower weight usually means better handling and a more fun driving experience...

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#128

Post by masklinn »

doublerebel wrote: post #66
MatthewPhillips wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That appears to be a pretty blatant clone of GitHub...

Exactly my point -- these 'new' Bitbucket features are a blatant clone of Github as well. I was expecting more from all the fanfare. For instance, users are clamoring to be able to link external issue trackers of their choice (which can be done simply by URL). I think the first host to supply that feature will have a step up.

> these 'new' Bitbucket features are a blatant clone of Github as well

I think you misplaced the word "some". Inline pull-request comments are ripped off gh, but I've never seen arbitrary commit diffs there, it certainly isn't in the UI. The branch selector yes, the overview not at all. The UI organization has also, if anything, moved further away from Github's.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#129

Post by bitcartel »

kybernetikos wrote: post #93
jksmith wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long will it take for the private repos to be hacked? Would you put the company revenue generating jewels in there?

Do you think it's more or less likely to get hacked than private repositories on github (which are already trusted by many companies)? Before you answer, consider http://www.extremetech.com/computing/120981-github-hacked-mi...

The crown jewels should always be kept under lock and key!

A couple of years ago I was at one of the Github drink meetups. I asked if they were working on encrypted private repos (this was just before or around the time Github Firewall was introduced). A Github employee told me no… before adding that in his opinion source code was not valuable.

I asked him to clarify and he said imagine if Twitter had their source code leaked. It wouldn't be a big issue as Twitters success was built more on business execution rather than code. A valid point perhaps but small indie developers could easily be put out of business if the source code to their unique selling point or competitive advantage were to be made public.

I'm sure Github (and others) take security seriously, but given the above, caveat emptor!

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#130

Post by paulgb »

lee wrote: post #96
sergiotapia wrote: post #89

I wrote a blog post on BitBucket workflow (obviously now it's outdated) and the BitBucket team sent me a free tshirt! http://www.dreamincode.net/forums/blog/1267/entry-3659-visua... I love their website and how you can create free private repos. Good business practice: Unlimited private projects, limited contributers on private projects. Win-win Github is just greedy.

>Github is just greedy. No, Github is a business. BitBucket is offering free private accounts as a loss leader, not out of the kindness of their hearts. This is their strategy for competing with GitHub. A $7/month subscription for private github repos is well worth it.

GitHub's loss leader is providing ad-free hosting for millions lines of open source software. That's not only a good business decision, but one that benefits everyone. I happily pay $12/month for GitHub because nearly all the open-source projects I develop with are on there and I don't want to bother operating two accounts.
Post reply on HN