6 ms·

Why we moved away from GitHub

67 points by karlalopez 11y ago

LoSboccacc 11y ago
I moved to bitbucket as well but for the team features not for the ecosystem: I hate jira and confluence with passion.
- zyxley 11y ago
  JIRA is one of those things that I've always seen mentioned as amazing if set up properly... but I've never seen it set up "properly". It seems to always get harnessed to the needs of management and/or multipurposed for a hundred different uses, leading to a horrifyingly overcomplicated ticketing process.
  - james-skemp 11y ago
    We're using it for agile and a number of us have realized that the tool (JIRA) dictates our workflow instead of the other way around. So this rings really true to me.
- jjuhl 11y ago
  I very much agree with the confluence comment. The search feature sucks. It can't find anything even when search terms directly matches words in the content it sometimes still show completly irrelevant pages first. And the editor. Ohh, don't get me started on the editor. It gets confused about formatting so you can't change it. Sometimes random keystrokes jump to the end of the page. The in-page search and replace sometimes ignores the first character. Sometimes when pasting content it preserves formatting and sometimes it just completly garbles the result (especially if tables are involved). When undoing it's quite random whether it will undo your last change, do nothing or undo a random number of changes (and redo is rarely the inverse of the undo you just did). And much much more crap. I hate it with a passion.
  - gknoy 11y ago
    I would love a "Trust me, I know what I'm doing. Give me a text box to paste Markdown into..." option for Confluence and Jira.
- codebook 11y ago
  Agreed for JIRA and Confluence. They are quite hard to set correctly and use correctly. I'd like to +1 for slack. Simple to use and manageable without much knowledge.
omni 11y ago
This article is low-content and reads like a paid shill for Bitbucket. Here's a summary if you haven't clicked yet: * We think GitHub is expensive * We use JIRA (no real justification given) * Bitbucket has a better price for our use case and integrates better with JIRA
- jevgeni 11y ago
  This is a short personal opinion. It is debatable how front page worthy it is, but calling it a paid shill is silly. After all, this isn't Russia Today's comment section.
  - baldfat 11y ago
    I personally prefer bitbucket for all my personal repos. I get unlimited private repos for free.
    - hardwaresofton 11y ago
      This. While I don't know if they would do it if they were as popular as they want to be (maybe bitbucket desperately wants to charge but don't feel like they could compete if they did), I personally use bitbucket for this very reason. Sometimes I also use bitbucket just to get away from hosting every single thing in Github. Nothing against Github (I use it quite a bit, and from what I've read their culture and ethics are good if not great), but regardless of their intentions, I'd rather not have one company monopolize mindshare
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- xvolter 11y ago
  Agreed. This immediately shot up to the top too, suggests to me their team might have heightened it. Either way, if you want to go for cheap, use Gitlab.com which is also free to use, but can host it yourself so can be far more secure and private, and has great integration with Jira as well. Along with a ton of other issue trackers, since I personally don't like Jira.
vimota 11y ago
You may know about this already but Jira has Github integration as well [1]... [1] http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/04/connecting-jira-6-2-github/ http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/04/connecting-jira-6-2-githu...
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- brokentone 11y ago
  Noted in the article... "Github _can_ integrate with Jira, but it has multi-minute delays before Jira gets all of the information. We got tired of it. Seriously. It only takes 30 seconds to break flow. Github's delay broke flow."
  - xvolter 11y ago
    That seems like an issue for Jira, not Github IMO. Atlasssian owning both Jira and Bitbucket though, seems like they'd prefer to keep it the way it is for this very reason.
  - kitwalker12 11y ago
    We integrate github with our Jira. I think we have synced over 20 repos. We don't see any delays between commits and Jira issues.
beliu 11y ago
For those considering alternatives, here's another (currently also HN front page): https://src.sourcegraph.com/sourcegraph@b1af2ab4761618930f6f7e44eb775e08fac3f38e/.tree/README.md https://src.sourcegraph.com/sourcegraph@b1af2ab4761618930f6f... Key features: - jump to definition right in browser - find usage examples - full text AND symbol search - source code publicly available - self-hosted, installable in 5 minutes Full disclosure: I'm co-founder of Sourcegraph.
cheshire137 11y ago
That GIF was super distracting while trying to read.
nickbauman 11y ago
One of my clients moved their repos from Bitbucket to Github because Bitbucket's uptime had become a reliability issue. The team really dislikes the Pull Request interface of GitHub compared to Bitbucket (as do I).
- zyxley 11y ago
  Could you elaborate on what you prefer about the Bitbucket equivalent?
  - gknoy 11y ago
    The biggest difference I see is that Bitbucket's diff view is a tree of changed files, rather than a unified diff. There are things I like about both -- I like that I can get an overview of what changed in Bitbucket, and have a better high-level view of changes. I still miss the unified diff view from Github, though -- it seemed to work well for small changes, and kept me in the flow for reading, and worked better on a narrower screen (since it didn't need a left-side navigation section). That was the main thing I missed when I first moved to Bitbucket.
dstaheli 11y ago
I prefer VS Team Services. The Pull Request UI rules. https://www.visualstudio.com/features/version-control-vs https://www.visualstudio.com/features/version-control-vs
webo 11y ago
The problem with Bitbucket is that it does not integrate with many dev tools and services. Even the most popular CI tools such as CircleCI and Travis do not support Bitbucket and work with only GitHub. I don't mind paying a small price for these conveniences.
- tootie 11y ago
  I find it hard to believe that any CI wouldn't integrate with any generic git repo.
  - detaro 11y ago
    TravisCI has the following issue about that: https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/667 https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/667 TL;DR: they use Github for auth, user management, ... and don't want to rebuild that stuff outside of Github.
bedros 11y ago
for my own use, I setup digital ocean droplet and installed redmine.org with mercurial HG all for the cost of abou5 $5 a month.
bigtunacan 11y ago
Unless you are using Mercurial why use BitBucket or Stash? If cost is the main concern then it seems like GitLab would be a better option and it has great integrations available and is open source. And if you don't mind hosting yourself then there are other options too like Gogs. My personal experience with BitBucket is that the feature set is poor compared to alternatives.
momania 11y ago
"Github charges based on the number of repositories" Might be worth noticing that this is for the SaaS. The enterprise install is charged per user. Makes sense too I guess since then you pay for your own storage anyway, where for the SaaS most of the costs is, hence charged per repo.
stickfigure 11y ago
This is good to read. The marketplace needs healthy alternatives and it would be a shame if Github turned into the kind of natural monopoly that Ebay or Facebook are. I say this as a happy Github user who doesn't want Github to get complacent. Bitbucket puts heavy effort into their integration with JIRA. Their pricing model is totally different. Yeay for choice!
Hortinstein 11y ago
Just a side question, if someone who uses Github as part of a professional organization could answer. Has the limit on private repositories ever driven publishing of open source libraries for some of your repos?
jamesjang0 11y ago
Bitbucket was becoming more and more unreliable (server being down for no reason or due to "wrong config") so we had to switch over to Github
jjuhl 11y ago
Setting up your own repo with push/pull via ssh is trivial. If your needs are just "company internal" that's the path I'd suggest.
dankohn1 11y ago
My take is that there is real value by integrating your issue tracker with your source repo. If you start with Jira, it's not surprising you would end up with Bitbucket. If you start with Github, it is very easy to use the Github issues tracker. And, if you want extra Github issues functionality (like a Kanban view), I recommend https://waffle.io https://waffle.io.
hch 11y ago
If your startup cannot afford GitHub i suggest you sell the Ping Pong table

67 points by karlalopez 11y ago

LoSboccacc 11y ago

I moved to bitbucket as well but for the team features not for the ecosystem: I hate jira and confluence with passion.

zyxley 11y ago
JIRA is one of those things that I've always seen mentioned as amazing if set up properly... but I've never seen it set up "properly". It seems to always get harnessed to the needs of management and/or multipurposed for a hundred different uses, leading to a horrifyingly overcomplicated ticketing process.
- james-skemp 11y ago
  We're using it for agile and a number of us have realized that the tool (JIRA) dictates our workflow instead of the other way around. So this rings really true to me.
jjuhl 11y ago
I very much agree with the confluence comment. The search feature sucks. It can't find anything even when search terms directly matches words in the content it sometimes still show completly irrelevant pages first. And the editor. Ohh, don't get me started on the editor. It gets confused about formatting so you can't change it. Sometimes random keystrokes jump to the end of the page. The in-page search and replace sometimes ignores the first character. Sometimes when pasting content it preserves formatting and sometimes it just completly garbles the result (especially if tables are involved). When undoing it's quite random whether it will undo your last change, do nothing or undo a random number of changes (and redo is rarely the inverse of the undo you just did). And much much more crap. I hate it with a passion.
- gknoy 11y ago
  I would love a "Trust me, I know what I'm doing. Give me a text box to paste Markdown into..." option for Confluence and Jira.
codebook 11y ago
Agreed for JIRA and Confluence. They are quite hard to set correctly and use correctly. I'd like to +1 for slack. Simple to use and manageable without much knowledge.

omni 11y ago

This article is low-content and reads like a paid shill for Bitbucket. Here's a summary if you haven't clicked yet: * We think GitHub is expensive * We use JIRA (no real justification given) * Bitbucket has a better price for our use case and integrates better with JIRA

jevgeni 11y ago
This is a short personal opinion. It is debatable how front page worthy it is, but calling it a paid shill is silly. After all, this isn't Russia Today's comment section.
- baldfat 11y ago
  I personally prefer bitbucket for all my personal repos. I get unlimited private repos for free.
  - hardwaresofton 11y ago
    This. While I don't know if they would do it if they were as popular as they want to be (maybe bitbucket desperately wants to charge but don't feel like they could compete if they did), I personally use bitbucket for this very reason. Sometimes I also use bitbucket just to get away from hosting every single thing in Github. Nothing against Github (I use it quite a bit, and from what I've read their culture and ethics are good if not great), but regardless of their intentions, I'd rather not have one company monopolize mindshare
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
xvolter 11y ago
Agreed. This immediately shot up to the top too, suggests to me their team might have heightened it. Either way, if you want to go for cheap, use Gitlab.com which is also free to use, but can host it yourself so can be far more secure and private, and has great integration with Jira as well. Along with a ton of other issue trackers, since I personally don't like Jira.

vimota 11y ago

You may know about this already but Jira has Github integration as well [1]... [1] http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/04/connecting-jira-6-2-github/ http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/04/connecting-jira-6-2-githu...

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
brokentone 11y ago
Noted in the article... "Github _can_ integrate with Jira, but it has multi-minute delays before Jira gets all of the information. We got tired of it. Seriously. It only takes 30 seconds to break flow. Github's delay broke flow."
- xvolter 11y ago
  That seems like an issue for Jira, not Github IMO. Atlasssian owning both Jira and Bitbucket though, seems like they'd prefer to keep it the way it is for this very reason.
- kitwalker12 11y ago
  We integrate github with our Jira. I think we have synced over 20 repos. We don't see any delays between commits and Jira issues.

beliu 11y ago

For those considering alternatives, here's another (currently also HN front page): https://src.sourcegraph.com/sourcegraph@b1af2ab4761618930f6f7e44eb775e08fac3f38e/.tree/README.md https://src.sourcegraph.com/sourcegraph@b1af2ab4761618930f6f... Key features: - jump to definition right in browser - find usage examples - full text AND symbol search - source code publicly available - self-hosted, installable in 5 minutes Full disclosure: I'm co-founder of Sourcegraph.

cheshire137 11y ago

That GIF was super distracting while trying to read.

nickbauman 11y ago

One of my clients moved their repos from Bitbucket to Github because Bitbucket's uptime had become a reliability issue. The team really dislikes the Pull Request interface of GitHub compared to Bitbucket (as do I).

zyxley 11y ago
Could you elaborate on what you prefer about the Bitbucket equivalent?
- gknoy 11y ago
  The biggest difference I see is that Bitbucket's diff view is a tree of changed files, rather than a unified diff. There are things I like about both -- I like that I can get an overview of what changed in Bitbucket, and have a better high-level view of changes. I still miss the unified diff view from Github, though -- it seemed to work well for small changes, and kept me in the flow for reading, and worked better on a narrower screen (since it didn't need a left-side navigation section). That was the main thing I missed when I first moved to Bitbucket.

dstaheli 11y ago

I prefer VS Team Services. The Pull Request UI rules. https://www.visualstudio.com/features/version-control-vs https://www.visualstudio.com/features/version-control-vs

webo 11y ago

The problem with Bitbucket is that it does not integrate with many dev tools and services. Even the most popular CI tools such as CircleCI and Travis do not support Bitbucket and work with only GitHub. I don't mind paying a small price for these conveniences.

tootie 11y ago
I find it hard to believe that any CI wouldn't integrate with any generic git repo.
- detaro 11y ago
  TravisCI has the following issue about that: https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/667 https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/667 TL;DR: they use Github for auth, user management, ... and don't want to rebuild that stuff outside of Github.

bedros 11y ago

for my own use, I setup digital ocean droplet and installed redmine.org with mercurial HG all for the cost of abou5 $5 a month.

bigtunacan 11y ago

Unless you are using Mercurial why use BitBucket or Stash? If cost is the main concern then it seems like GitLab would be a better option and it has great integrations available and is open source. And if you don't mind hosting yourself then there are other options too like Gogs. My personal experience with BitBucket is that the feature set is poor compared to alternatives.

momania 11y ago

"Github charges based on the number of repositories" Might be worth noticing that this is for the SaaS. The enterprise install is charged per user. Makes sense too I guess since then you pay for your own storage anyway, where for the SaaS most of the costs is, hence charged per repo.

stickfigure 11y ago

This is good to read. The marketplace needs healthy alternatives and it would be a shame if Github turned into the kind of natural monopoly that Ebay or Facebook are. I say this as a happy Github user who doesn't want Github to get complacent. Bitbucket puts heavy effort into their integration with JIRA. Their pricing model is totally different. Yeay for choice!

Hortinstein 11y ago

Just a side question, if someone who uses Github as part of a professional organization could answer. Has the limit on private repositories ever driven publishing of open source libraries for some of your repos?

jamesjang0 11y ago

Bitbucket was becoming more and more unreliable (server being down for no reason or due to "wrong config") so we had to switch over to Github

jjuhl 11y ago

Setting up your own repo with push/pull via ssh is trivial. If your needs are just "company internal" that's the path I'd suggest.

dankohn1 11y ago

My take is that there is real value by integrating your issue tracker with your source repo. If you start with Jira, it's not surprising you would end up with Bitbucket. If you start with Github, it is very easy to use the Github issues tracker. And, if you want extra Github issues functionality (like a Kanban view), I recommend https://waffle.io https://waffle.io.

hch 11y ago

If your startup cannot afford GitHub i suggest you sell the Ping Pong table