10 ms·

This is so telling: GitHub had a blog post yesterday[1] about pull requests and now Atlassian does today with a very similar title. The one from GitHub was abou

by puls 12y ago

This is so telling: GitHub had a blog post yesterday[1] about pull requests and now Atlassian does today with a very similar title. The one from GitHub was about social dynamics and how to work together better, while the one from Atlassian is about technical minutiae. Having used both GitHub and Stash, the difference in focus between the two companies comes across plainly, and these two blog posts only back it up. [1]: https://github.com/blog/1943-how-to-write-the-perfect-pull-request https://github.com/blog/1943-how-to-write-the-perfect-pull-r...

jessaustin 12y ago
Atlassian are talking about a real problem here, which problem they appear to have solved. Working code is usually superior to social convention (rebase, etc.); that's why we're using git (or possibly other DVCSs) instead of RCS, etc.
- jMyles 12y ago
  Not sure I agree. In either case, both a social convention and an expected response from the executed command are necessary because both the "double dot" and "triple dot" logic are necessary to truly understand the implications of a complex pull request. In the case of Atlassian's solution, the "merged" social convention will have to be use to first use and personally verify the "triple dot" findings in order to review that the change to the branch is, in isolation, as expected - before proceeding through the "double dot" flow that now characterizes the pull request feature. For Github, it's simply the inverse. Either way, both are relatively easy to achieve with the command line or a diff tool like Meld or LiClipse.
tootie 12y ago
It speaks to github's prominence in the open source community and Atlassians's prominence in professional/enterprise environments.
- mkinsella 12y ago
  Are there that many non-enterprise companies using Bitbucket over Github? Most startups and mid-sized companies I know use Github for private repo hosting.
  - SystemOut 12y ago
    We use BitBucket since we're a small shop from a developer count standpoint but we have a ton of small repos plus we migrated over a ton of legacy svn repos. GitHub gets expensive real quick when you are in that situation.
    - nucleardog 12y ago
      For anyone doing 'client work' rather than developing a single/few products, GitHub's pricing is almost prohibitively expensive. We have a little over a hundred repositories. This puts is in the $200/mo plan for GitHub (125 repository limit). Atlassian prices per-user. Our small three person dev team costs us nothing. We'll reach the next pricing tier when we hit our 6th developer, at which point it will cost us $10/mo and will remain that cost up to 10 developers. BitBucket's top plan is $200/mo. That gets you unlimited repositories and users compared to GitHub's 125 repositories. In the middle tier, GitHub charges $50/mo for 20 repositories whereas BitBucket charges $50/mo for 50 users. If you have few repositories but many users, GitHub's pricing is advantageous. If you have many repositories but few users, BitBucket makes way more sense.
  - iopq 12y ago
    Tons of startups that you don't even know about use Bitbucket for their free private repos. When you have a team of 1-5 people there is no reason to pay for Github.
    - jschwartzi 12y ago
      Bitbucket also supports Mercurial, which I find to be more user-friendly than Git with all of the same features.
  - 12y ago
rdtsc 12y ago
> The one from GitHub was about social dynamics and how to work together better, while the one from Atlassian is about technical minutiae. What is it telling us of? Are you implying something to the effect of Atlassian doesn't care about people working together (heck, maybe they hate humans, who knows) and Github loves community...?

by puls 12y ago

jessaustin 12y ago

Atlassian are talking about a real problem here, which problem they appear to have solved. Working code is usually superior to social convention (rebase, etc.); that's why we're using git (or possibly other DVCSs) instead of RCS, etc.

jMyles 12y ago
Not sure I agree. In either case, both a social convention and an expected response from the executed command are necessary because both the "double dot" and "triple dot" logic are necessary to truly understand the implications of a complex pull request. In the case of Atlassian's solution, the "merged" social convention will have to be use to first use and personally verify the "triple dot" findings in order to review that the change to the branch is, in isolation, as expected - before proceeding through the "double dot" flow that now characterizes the pull request feature. For Github, it's simply the inverse. Either way, both are relatively easy to achieve with the command line or a diff tool like Meld or LiClipse.

tootie 12y ago

It speaks to github's prominence in the open source community and Atlassians's prominence in professional/enterprise environments.

mkinsella 12y ago
Are there that many non-enterprise companies using Bitbucket over Github? Most startups and mid-sized companies I know use Github for private repo hosting.
- SystemOut 12y ago
  We use BitBucket since we're a small shop from a developer count standpoint but we have a ton of small repos plus we migrated over a ton of legacy svn repos. GitHub gets expensive real quick when you are in that situation.
  - nucleardog 12y ago
    For anyone doing 'client work' rather than developing a single/few products, GitHub's pricing is almost prohibitively expensive. We have a little over a hundred repositories. This puts is in the $200/mo plan for GitHub (125 repository limit). Atlassian prices per-user. Our small three person dev team costs us nothing. We'll reach the next pricing tier when we hit our 6th developer, at which point it will cost us $10/mo and will remain that cost up to 10 developers. BitBucket's top plan is $200/mo. That gets you unlimited repositories and users compared to GitHub's 125 repositories. In the middle tier, GitHub charges $50/mo for 20 repositories whereas BitBucket charges $50/mo for 50 users. If you have few repositories but many users, GitHub's pricing is advantageous. If you have many repositories but few users, BitBucket makes way more sense.
- iopq 12y ago
  Tons of startups that you don't even know about use Bitbucket for their free private repos. When you have a team of 1-5 people there is no reason to pay for Github.
  - jschwartzi 12y ago
    Bitbucket also supports Mercurial, which I find to be more user-friendly than Git with all of the same features.
- 12y ago

rdtsc 12y ago

> The one from GitHub was about social dynamics and how to work together better, while the one from Atlassian is about technical minutiae. What is it telling us of? Are you implying something to the effect of Atlassian doesn't care about people working together (heck, maybe they hate humans, who knows) and Github loves community...?