5 ms·

Given that Bitbucket has to spend time on fixing performance problems caused by still using basic auth for their API (rather than allowing multiple, revokable A

Given that Bitbucket has to spend time on fixing performance problems caused by still using basic auth for their API (rather than allowing multiple, revokable API tokens), I don't have too much hope that they'll get around to fixing the most popular, important issues on their own tracker, e.g. mostly useless (and poorly documented) webhooks: https://bitbucket.org/site/master/issue/7775/post-service-does-not-provide-useful https://bitbucket.org/site/master/issue/7775/post-service-do... While Bitbucket is popular as a cheap (in every sense) clone of GitHub, in many cases you get what you pay for. Paying for GitHub is worth it in terms of less frustration compared to using Bitbucket in general (plus their webhook/integration support and UI is exemplary), but are other services, such as GitLab, any better?

Lazare 12y ago
That webhook ticket is awesome. And by awesome I mean I am in awe of how long such basic functionality has been broken.
- ghuntley 12y ago
  That's nothing... Customers of Atlassian's hosted SaaS service OnDemand (Jira/Confluence) have been waiting 3 years for basic CNAME support. (ie: wiki.companyname.com instead of accountname.atlassian.net) https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/AOD-6999 https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/AOD-6999 Even though it is the most voted for issue, by a factor of three it was closed last week as WONT-FIX. Shameful - pages upon pages of enterprise customers given the royal f-u.
  - uaygsfdbzf 12y ago
    > Shameful - pages upon pages of enterprise customers given the royal f-u. No, that's not possible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6lK5hlB1nQ#t=115 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6lK5hlB1nQ#t=115 Further OT, I'm not a fan of how they advertise to their paying OnDemand customers by often animating in a banner at the top of each page, advertising some Atlassian meetup (in another country), or training or whatever. Doing this on the free site I could understand, but spamming paying customers while they use the app sucks.
  - Lazare 12y ago
    Yep, shameful. Ooh, I've got another good one: https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/CONF-9993 https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/CONF-9993 Basically asking for the ability to turn auto-play off when embedding videos into their wiki product, which seems fair enough because they really hyped their wiki's multimedia power back then. Ticket opened November 2007, got a bunch of comments and votes, finally fixed in March 2011. Or was it? From August 2011: "This issue shouldn't be closed. I still get this issue in numerous web browsers.", with a follow up in October suggesting it was still broken. No comment from Atlassian, of course. Whatever else you want to say about Atlassian, their development process is glacial, and their customer communications are very lackluster. It's like a tar pit where good projects go to get preserved in amber.
    - farkas 12y ago
      Can you point me to another company with a public bug tracker that you would reference as the gold standard? Whilst I know we can always improve (and we always try to), we always end up with some bug that has been open for 5+ years that has the most votes. By definition. At least with Atlassian you can see the bugs, vote on them, provide comments. If there is another company with this level of transparency that does it better - I'll get in contact to find out how. Scott, CEO Atlassian
pavlov 12y ago
My experience with GitHub is that the response times are very flaky, whether on a paid plan or not. I've given up on GitHub personally, and will only use it when the project is owned by someone else. Bitbucket is maybe "cheap in every sense", but it's also reliable.
- jackweirdy 12y ago
  I've never had that problem. That said, I think it's indicative of bending Git a little too far in the direction of centralisation. But I guess if you depend on issue tracking and/or CI, you have to step that way somewhat.
coherentpony 12y ago
>Given that Bitbucket has to spend time on fixing performance problems caused by still using basic auth for their API (rather than allowing multiple, revokable API tokens), I don't have too much hope that they'll get around to fixing the most popular, important issues on their own tracker To be completely fair, the speaker did mention in the video that it is probably better to migrate to API tokens.
- christop 12y ago
  Yeah, I did see that, but it's been ~nine months since the bcrypt change and from what he said, there still aren't any concrete plans to move to API tokens. But then, maybe that's why he said they're hiring!
  - ddbennett 12y ago
    That is one of many reasons why we are hiring. A dozen people can only do so much and we're looking for smart people with new ideas to help us start accelerating the development of BB.
_random_ 12y ago
I wouldn't move to GitHub even if it was to provide private repositories for free (which it doesn't). BitBucket just works flawlessly for my needs.
- jackweirdy 12y ago
  Aside: anyone with a .edu, .ac.uk or other education-ending email address can get 5 private repos for free. Is there anything specifically about GitHub which puts you off, or is it just that BitBucket works so you don't want to change?
  - onestone 12y ago
    > Is there anything specifically about GitHub which puts you off, or is it just that BitBucket works so you don't want to change? Github has a much worse record vs. Egor Homakov than Bitbucket :) Also, Github is Git-only, while Bitbucket supports both Git and Mercurial. I use both, but prefer Mercurial myself, despite it being less popular.
    - jackweirdy 12y ago
      GitHub definitely isn't git-only. It supports SVN too, and can import from SVN, Hg and TFS
  - anthony_d 12y ago
    I'll just volunteer that BitBucket has worked flawlessly for me for years. Of course I use repos others have setup in Github, but I've never seen any reason to switch.
  - _random_ 12y ago
    > Is there anything specifically about GitHub which puts you off, or is it just that BitBucket works so you don't want to change? The latter + all the hype surrounding the GitHub (thousands of 10-line "Ruby gems" and "JavaScript frameworks" don't help the browsability either). I generally dislike monopolies of ideas/implementations.
duiker101 12y ago
I started using bitbucket for the private repositories and I have to say, never had a problem... maybe I am not a hardcore user that tries to use the most obscure functionality, far from it. But I find myself fine with it.
yangmeyer 12y ago
Bitbucket works for me, as long all you do is hosting a git repo there. For everything else, I agree that it feels clunkier and generally less polished than GitHub. Point in case: I tried – and failed – to integrate Bitbucket services through their REST APIs in my upcoming Mac app (“git push assets” for designers - http://gemba.io http://gemba.io). After 2 fruitless days of trying to get an OAuth access token, I gave up. The Bitbucket way of doing OAuth felt weird to me, and the cluttered documentation (which felt a bit like Facebook’s developer documentation 3-4 years ago) didn’t really help. Doing the same for GitHub was a breeze. OAuth was straightforward, and documentation was unambiguous, concise and clear.

Lazare 12y ago

That webhook ticket is awesome. And by awesome I mean I am in awe of how long such basic functionality has been broken.

ghuntley 12y ago
That's nothing... Customers of Atlassian's hosted SaaS service OnDemand (Jira/Confluence) have been waiting 3 years for basic CNAME support. (ie: wiki.companyname.com instead of accountname.atlassian.net) https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/AOD-6999 https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/AOD-6999 Even though it is the most voted for issue, by a factor of three it was closed last week as WONT-FIX. Shameful - pages upon pages of enterprise customers given the royal f-u.
- uaygsfdbzf 12y ago
  > Shameful - pages upon pages of enterprise customers given the royal f-u. No, that's not possible: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6lK5hlB1nQ#t=115 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6lK5hlB1nQ#t=115 Further OT, I'm not a fan of how they advertise to their paying OnDemand customers by often animating in a banner at the top of each page, advertising some Atlassian meetup (in another country), or training or whatever. Doing this on the free site I could understand, but spamming paying customers while they use the app sucks.
- Lazare 12y ago
  Yep, shameful. Ooh, I've got another good one: https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/CONF-9993 https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/CONF-9993 Basically asking for the ability to turn auto-play off when embedding videos into their wiki product, which seems fair enough because they really hyped their wiki's multimedia power back then. Ticket opened November 2007, got a bunch of comments and votes, finally fixed in March 2011. Or was it? From August 2011: "This issue shouldn't be closed. I still get this issue in numerous web browsers.", with a follow up in October suggesting it was still broken. No comment from Atlassian, of course. Whatever else you want to say about Atlassian, their development process is glacial, and their customer communications are very lackluster. It's like a tar pit where good projects go to get preserved in amber.
  - farkas 12y ago
    Can you point me to another company with a public bug tracker that you would reference as the gold standard? Whilst I know we can always improve (and we always try to), we always end up with some bug that has been open for 5+ years that has the most votes. By definition. At least with Atlassian you can see the bugs, vote on them, provide comments. If there is another company with this level of transparency that does it better - I'll get in contact to find out how. Scott, CEO Atlassian

pavlov 12y ago

My experience with GitHub is that the response times are very flaky, whether on a paid plan or not. I've given up on GitHub personally, and will only use it when the project is owned by someone else. Bitbucket is maybe "cheap in every sense", but it's also reliable.

jackweirdy 12y ago
I've never had that problem. That said, I think it's indicative of bending Git a little too far in the direction of centralisation. But I guess if you depend on issue tracking and/or CI, you have to step that way somewhat.

coherentpony 12y ago

>Given that Bitbucket has to spend time on fixing performance problems caused by still using basic auth for their API (rather than allowing multiple, revokable API tokens), I don't have too much hope that they'll get around to fixing the most popular, important issues on their own tracker To be completely fair, the speaker did mention in the video that it is probably better to migrate to API tokens.

christop 12y ago
Yeah, I did see that, but it's been ~nine months since the bcrypt change and from what he said, there still aren't any concrete plans to move to API tokens. But then, maybe that's why he said they're hiring!
- ddbennett 12y ago
  That is one of many reasons why we are hiring. A dozen people can only do so much and we're looking for smart people with new ideas to help us start accelerating the development of BB.

_random_ 12y ago

I wouldn't move to GitHub even if it was to provide private repositories for free (which it doesn't). BitBucket just works flawlessly for my needs.

jackweirdy 12y ago
Aside: anyone with a .edu, .ac.uk or other education-ending email address can get 5 private repos for free. Is there anything specifically about GitHub which puts you off, or is it just that BitBucket works so you don't want to change?
- onestone 12y ago
  > Is there anything specifically about GitHub which puts you off, or is it just that BitBucket works so you don't want to change? Github has a much worse record vs. Egor Homakov than Bitbucket :) Also, Github is Git-only, while Bitbucket supports both Git and Mercurial. I use both, but prefer Mercurial myself, despite it being less popular.
  - jackweirdy 12y ago
    GitHub definitely isn't git-only. It supports SVN too, and can import from SVN, Hg and TFS
- anthony_d 12y ago
  I'll just volunteer that BitBucket has worked flawlessly for me for years. Of course I use repos others have setup in Github, but I've never seen any reason to switch.
- _random_ 12y ago
  > Is there anything specifically about GitHub which puts you off, or is it just that BitBucket works so you don't want to change? The latter + all the hype surrounding the GitHub (thousands of 10-line "Ruby gems" and "JavaScript frameworks" don't help the browsability either). I generally dislike monopolies of ideas/implementations.

duiker101 12y ago

I started using bitbucket for the private repositories and I have to say, never had a problem... maybe I am not a hardcore user that tries to use the most obscure functionality, far from it. But I find myself fine with it.

yangmeyer 12y ago

Bitbucket works for me, as long all you do is hosting a git repo there. For everything else, I agree that it feels clunkier and generally less polished than GitHub. Point in case: I tried – and failed – to integrate Bitbucket services through their REST APIs in my upcoming Mac app (“git push assets” for designers - http://gemba.io http://gemba.io). After 2 fruitless days of trying to get an OAuth access token, I gave up. The Bitbucket way of doing OAuth felt weird to me, and the cluttered documentation (which felt a bit like Facebook’s developer documentation 3-4 years ago) didn’t really help. Doing the same for GitHub was a breeze. OAuth was straightforward, and documentation was unambiguous, concise and clear.