Bitbucket from Australian-headquartered Atlassian offers source code management and version control.
$0
per month
Crucible
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
Atlasssian Crucible is a peer review tool for finding bugs and defects in version control tools Subversion, Git, Mercurial, CVS, and Perforce.
N/A
Pricing
Bitbucket
Crucible
Editions & Modules
Free (up to 5 users)
$0
per month
Standard
$3
per user/per month
Premium
$6
per user/per month
Data Center
1,980
per year
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Bitbucket
Crucible
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Bitbucket
Crucible
Considered Both Products
Bitbucket
No answer on this topic
Crucible
Verified User
Engineer
Chose Crucible
I think Crucible isn't quite as clean as Stash/Bitbucket, but it does some things better, like seeing individual commits easier. I also like how stash groups all comments on the overview of the Pull Request.
Not exactly an apples to apples comparison. Back when we were using SVN, Crucible was the go-to solution for code review. As we started moving to use Git and using pull requests (via Bitbucket), code review is now performed by using pull requests exclusively.
As a team we need to push code into the repo on daily basis, Bitbucket has proven that is a reliable and secure server to save and get the code available in no time. The administration part is really easy and there's an extra tool for every developer profile either if you want to use the console or a GUI like Sourcetree.
Crucible is well suited for situations where development teams follow a branch-based merge process, where new features or automation stories are introduced. It allows more seasoned team members to check newer team members' code to ensure standards are followed. It is probably less appropriate for smaller development teams or smaller projects, where code reviews can be less formal.
Very easy to integrate with other DevOps tools like Jenkins and with project/workflow management tools like JIRA.
Very efficient in managing security and compliance standards for code, especially during pull requests, merge requests, branching, etc.
Very robust in performance, especially the cloud and datacenter versions hardly hit any performance issues and supports more than 2000+ developers in my company.
Crucible notifications of changes or updates to the code review are delayed as well as loading more source code is slow.
Crucible is formatting could use improvements for viewing customization features. For instance, allowing the user to create a new tab per file to be reviewed would be nice to have.
All products have room for improvement. The system improves over time with better and better integrations and I look forward to even more features without paying extra! The system has increased transparency across my organization and with this transparency comes increased throughput on projects. I don't think I can go back to any other system and we are definitely married to this product.
The architecture of Bitbucket makes it more easily scalable than other source code management repositories. Also, administration and maintaining the instance is very easy. It integrates with JIRA and other CI/CD applications which makes it more useful to reduce the efforts. It supports multiple plugins and those bring a lot of extra functionality. It increases the overall efficiency and usefulness of Bitbucket.
The customer support provided by Atlassian (Bitbucket's parent company that also makes Jira, Confluence, etc.) is very helpful. They seem to be very concerned about any issues reported with their products and even just questions about functionality. They are constantly improving the products with new features in nearly every release. Plus they have a plethora of online documentation to reference.
For the features we were looking at, Bitbucket, GitHub and GitLab were all at par and were in a similar price range. We found that GitHub was the most full featured should we need to scale very quickly. GitLab was at par with GitHub for our future needs, but GitHub was a more familiar tool compared to GitLab. Bitbucket won out because of its close integration with Jira and being in the Atlassian family. It was also cheaper than GitHub. As we started with Jira, Bitbucket addition became a natural next step for us. We really liked Bitbucket and stayed with it but we do know we have great options in the form of GitHub and GitLab should we need to scale fast.
Crucible was first on the market and the price is inexpensive. Crucible integrates with Jira Software and Atlassian Fisheye, providing the ability to track defects efficiently. SonarQube compares code to 'best standards' but not 'internal standards' and does not integrate to issue tracking. GitHub offers effective peer review, and has some integration with GitHub issues but costs more.
