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

161–170 of 292 posts

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#162

Post by ckeck »

mitjak wrote: post #110
Osiris wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've tried at least a dozen Git GUIs for both PC and Mac and SourceTree is by far my favorite.

Can you elaborate on why? I've found it to be far from intuitive and basically a direct mapping of CLI commands straight into UI elements. A user unfamiliar with command line git arguments would have a difficult time with SourceTree, I would imagine (most of my coworkers have).

I haven't seen it mentioned here but Tower for Mac OS has been a great tool for those who are not too familiar with git or it's associated commands. I've recommended it to at least a few hundred clients many of which use it religiously today.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#163

Post by charlieok »

bryanh wrote: post #8

For a while I was a bit worried that GitHub had just ran away with the prize and no one else was bothering. It is pretty obvious that Google isn't interested in improving Google Code and that Sourceforge hasn't aged a day (that's not really fair, but it feels like it). I think there is still a chance for BitBucket to make a splash, but I think its going to be hard to win anymore. That's fine, 2nd place makes a lot of…

Since BitBucket is run by Atlassian, whose primary business (as far as I know) is enterprise software, I would guess (again without knowing) that they're in a pretty good position.

They're well known for their wiki, Confluence, and their ticket/issue/task tracker, JIRA. Source control is a natural extension of those tools, which I'd guess have had some effort put into making sure they work well together.

Looks like Stash is what they sell to enterprises, versus BitBucket which is hosted. Anyone know if these are completely separate products, or if they share a common codebase?

I've found SourceTree to be a great GUI tool for working on Git/Mercurial repos.

All of which is to say, good on them. I'm glad to see two very respectable players in this space.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#164

Post by patrickambron »

charlieok wrote: post #163
bryanh wrote: post #8

For a while I was a bit worried that GitHub had just ran away with the prize and no one else was bothering. It is pretty obvious that Google isn't interested in improving Google Code and that Sourceforge hasn't aged a day (that's not really fair, but it feels like it). I think there is still a chance for BitBucket to make a splash, but I think its going to be hard to win anymore. That's fine, 2nd place makes a lot of…

Since BitBucket is run by Atlassian, whose primary business (as far as I know) is enterprise software, I would guess (again without knowing) that they're in a pretty good position. They're well known for their wiki, Confluence, and their ticket/issue/task tracker, JIRA. Source control is a natural extension of those tools, which I'd guess have had some effort put into making sure they work well together. Looks like S…

Just started using Confluence. If you're willing to use their hosted version, it's one of the best project management softwares I've used.

I would gladly use more products by them

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#165

Post by scribu »

ericcholis wrote: post #6
dkhenry wrote: post #3

I know its not the elephant in the managed source code hosting space, but I like BitBucket better then Github. I like the option to use Mercerial for projects and I like the way they ask me to pay for things ( pay for private shared repositories ).

I like http://beanstalkapp.com/ myself, pretty comparable to BitBucket.

We switched over from Beanstalk to Github a few months ago.

Beanstalk's web interface had fewer features and, more worryingly, it just failed to display changesets quite often (was also down for maintenance relatively frequently).

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#167

Post by niels »

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!

Well, the fact that Bitbucket didn't support Git until half a year ago, probably explains it.

Re: Introducing the Redesigned Bitbucket

#168

Post by rogerbinns »

bryanh wrote: post #8

For a while I was a bit worried that GitHub had just ran away with the prize and no one else was bothering. It is pretty obvious that Google isn't interested in improving Google Code and that Sourceforge hasn't aged a day (that's not really fair, but it feels like it). I think there is still a chance for BitBucket to make a splash, but I think its going to be hard to win anymore. That's fine, 2nd place makes a lot of…

I really wish Google Code would support paid/private projects. Every startup I have been at would have been more productive with Google Code. Their bug tracker is better than both GitHub and BitBucket. We wouldn't have needed yet another set of accounts due to already being on Google. And critically they let you have multiple repositories for the same project. That is a huge annoyance with GitHub and BitBucket where you have exactly one repository (sometimes a second "wiki" one) and then one bug tracker, downloads etc. Every project I have worked on has multiple repositories (eg a server part, testing code, android client, admin tools, ios client). It has been of zero benefit having each one with its own bug tracker, downloads, wiki etc as often issues cross boundaries (eg bad display in client could be because of a bug in server returning bad data).

People have been begging Google to pay them! https://code.google.com/p/support/issues/detail?id=1829

Post reply on HN