4 ms·

No offence, but as someone who has only ever used github and gitlab, can you clarify why it's uncool?

by random_visitor 6y ago

pjc50 6y ago
Probably spillover from hating Jira, the popular-but-bad bug tracker system.
- patates 6y ago
  Jira is not bad per se, people use it like a generic CMS, and it also can be one, and that creates problems.
- sammorrowdrums 6y ago
  Yeah, hatred mostly because Jira is the grand enabler of micromanagers and corporate accountability and a bit slow. It can be whatever people want to use it for. The customisation and the key features of the tool are not bad. Then again, most tools are neutral until a person wields them. [Edit typo]
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    Jira is heaven compared with Excel sheets, or half backed task management done by Summer interns than many of us have suffered with. I have endured all, from web forms storing their data via Perl CGI scripts to Excel sheets which require a PhD in VBA macros to change anything.
    - raxxorrax 6y ago
      True, those solutions are always horrible. Still don't like Jira that much. Every corp somehow managed to slow that system down to a crawl that using it became a pain. Still a great fan of Trac. Old but gold, simple and fast. Suffers a bit from a historical focus on SVN, but can be adapted to git easily.
- tilolebo 6y ago
  There's a consensus in hating Jira, but nobody could ever agree on a suitable alternative. I get that Jira can be poorly configured, but it's not Lotus Notes bad.
patates 6y ago
Their abrupt cease of support for mercurial damaged it beyond repair for me and many others. They didn't even offer to migrate stuff with the click of a button, people started writing scripts to migrate, and while you are migrating, why not to GitHub which in the meantime also gained free private repositories?
- nix23 6y ago
  >abrupt cease of support for mercurial Yes exactly that, i think for bit-bucket it would have been less damaging NOT to support git but exclusively mercurial..and maybe bitkeeper ;)
- maccard 6y ago
  > Their abrupt cease of support for mercurial damaged it beyond repair for me and many others. I'm not the biggest Atlassian fan, but they posted in August last year, gave 10 months notice and cited that less than 1% of new repos being created are using mercurial as their primary reason for doing so. If you cared about a project, almost a year is plenty of time to move it. I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to sunset a feature that is not widely used by your users, not widely used outside of your userbase, and that requires ongoing maintenance that the other 99% of repositories could benefit from instead.
  - patates 6y ago
    It was more like a community and they destroyed it. Less than 1% of new repos were mercurial (what a surprise with zero mentions of mercurial anywhere except small text and zero marketing and they didn't even have it in their self-hosted product), sure, but existing repos were the problem. Some abandoned ones are lost forever. At least archive them, offer a tar download, anything... People had to parse the issues, people had to parse discussions, all the settings, access rights... I think after a year they could put everything in archive mode, but no, they deleted it with no easy export. That's not OK and I'm clearly very, very angry as a former user.
    - maccard 6y ago
sammorrowdrums 6y ago
Firstly Bitbucket allowed free personal private repos, so many people who did not actually want to use it did for closed source projects. Bitbucket has generally had the least pleasing UI, and the association with Atlassian sort of corporate feel made it seem uncool to a degree. It just didn't really feel great to use for me. I've used all 3 extensively. I've transitioned with companies from Github to Gitlab, from Bitbucket to GitHub etc. but never to Bitbucket. In fairness I was using Gitlab during their great outage, so I can say that cool is not always reliable. And coolness fades and dies relatively fast. But I can't remember Bitbucket ever being cool.
jaekash 6y ago
Atlassian products is a collection of poorly integrated and maintained applications each with serious issues which Atlassian refuses to fix. Atlassian is basically where things go to die.
- pjmlp 6y ago
  If Atlassian products is a collection of poorly integrated what to say about plenty of enterprise solutions? I am yet to find something that works as good as Atlassian products.
  - kelnos 6y ago
    I disagree with the parent that they're poorly integrated. They're probably better-integrated than most other options out there. IMO the real problem with Atlassian products is that individually they are not good. Confluence is a bad wiki, Jira is a bad issue/project tracker, Bitbucket is a bad source code management tool. Individually they all have a lot of flaws to the point that if they only existed on their own, no one would use them. But features like native support for referencing Jira issues in Confluence and having them auto-update makes companies want to use it. Part of it, I think, is the development tool version of "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM". It's considered the safe choice. Enterprise-y companies get wooed by all the "Atlassian consultants" floating around out there. The ecosystem is just designed to attract enterprise users.
    - pjmlp 6y ago
      I have been a very happy user every time I used Atlassian products on their own, so bad are many of the in-house enterprise alternatives, or products like DOORS and Notes.
      - kelnos 6y ago
        Each to their own, I guess. We use Jira and Confluence at my org. I personally don't make use of the integrations between them all that much, but I find them painful to use on their own.

No offence, but as someone who has only ever used github and gitlab, can you clarify why it's uncool?

pjc50 6y ago

Probably spillover from hating Jira, the popular-but-bad bug tracker system.

patates 6y ago
Jira is not bad per se, people use it like a generic CMS, and it also can be one, and that creates problems.
sammorrowdrums 6y ago
Yeah, hatred mostly because Jira is the grand enabler of micromanagers and corporate accountability and a bit slow. It can be whatever people want to use it for. The customisation and the key features of the tool are not bad. Then again, most tools are neutral until a person wields them. [Edit typo]
- pjmlp 6y ago
  Jira is heaven compared with Excel sheets, or half backed task management done by Summer interns than many of us have suffered with. I have endured all, from web forms storing their data via Perl CGI scripts to Excel sheets which require a PhD in VBA macros to change anything.
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    True, those solutions are always horrible. Still don't like Jira that much. Every corp somehow managed to slow that system down to a crawl that using it became a pain. Still a great fan of Trac. Old but gold, simple and fast. Suffers a bit from a historical focus on SVN, but can be adapted to git easily.
tilolebo 6y ago
There's a consensus in hating Jira, but nobody could ever agree on a suitable alternative. I get that Jira can be poorly configured, but it's not Lotus Notes bad.

patates 6y ago

Their abrupt cease of support for mercurial damaged it beyond repair for me and many others. They didn't even offer to migrate stuff with the click of a button, people started writing scripts to migrate, and while you are migrating, why not to GitHub which in the meantime also gained free private repositories?

nix23 6y ago
>abrupt cease of support for mercurial Yes exactly that, i think for bit-bucket it would have been less damaging NOT to support git but exclusively mercurial..and maybe bitkeeper ;)
maccard 6y ago
> Their abrupt cease of support for mercurial damaged it beyond repair for me and many others. I'm not the biggest Atlassian fan, but they posted in August last year, gave 10 months notice and cited that less than 1% of new repos being created are using mercurial as their primary reason for doing so. If you cared about a project, almost a year is plenty of time to move it. I don't think it's entirely unreasonable to sunset a feature that is not widely used by your users, not widely used outside of your userbase, and that requires ongoing maintenance that the other 99% of repositories could benefit from instead.
- patates 6y ago
  It was more like a community and they destroyed it. Less than 1% of new repos were mercurial (what a surprise with zero mentions of mercurial anywhere except small text and zero marketing and they didn't even have it in their self-hosted product), sure, but existing repos were the problem. Some abandoned ones are lost forever. At least archive them, offer a tar download, anything... People had to parse the issues, people had to parse discussions, all the settings, access rights... I think after a year they could put everything in archive mode, but no, they deleted it with no easy export. That's not OK and I'm clearly very, very angry as a former user.
  - maccard 6y ago

sammorrowdrums 6y ago

Firstly Bitbucket allowed free personal private repos, so many people who did not actually want to use it did for closed source projects. Bitbucket has generally had the least pleasing UI, and the association with Atlassian sort of corporate feel made it seem uncool to a degree. It just didn't really feel great to use for me. I've used all 3 extensively. I've transitioned with companies from Github to Gitlab, from Bitbucket to GitHub etc. but never to Bitbucket. In fairness I was using Gitlab during their great outage, so I can say that cool is not always reliable. And coolness fades and dies relatively fast. But I can't remember Bitbucket ever being cool.

jaekash 6y ago

Atlassian products is a collection of poorly integrated and maintained applications each with serious issues which Atlassian refuses to fix. Atlassian is basically where things go to die.

pjmlp 6y ago
If Atlassian products is a collection of poorly integrated what to say about plenty of enterprise solutions? I am yet to find something that works as good as Atlassian products.
- kelnos 6y ago
  I disagree with the parent that they're poorly integrated. They're probably better-integrated than most other options out there. IMO the real problem with Atlassian products is that individually they are not good. Confluence is a bad wiki, Jira is a bad issue/project tracker, Bitbucket is a bad source code management tool. Individually they all have a lot of flaws to the point that if they only existed on their own, no one would use them. But features like native support for referencing Jira issues in Confluence and having them auto-update makes companies want to use it. Part of it, I think, is the development tool version of "nobody ever got fired for buying IBM". It's considered the safe choice. Enterprise-y companies get wooed by all the "Atlassian consultants" floating around out there. The ecosystem is just designed to attract enterprise users.
  - pjmlp 6y ago
    I have been a very happy user every time I used Atlassian products on their own, so bad are many of the in-house enterprise alternatives, or products like DOORS and Notes.
    - kelnos 6y ago
      Each to their own, I guess. We use Jira and Confluence at my org. I personally don't make use of the integrations between them all that much, but I find them painful to use on their own.