Apache Archiva vs. GitHub

Well suited for small organizations to medium-sized teams/organizations. Apache Archiva is well suited for:

• It acts as a central repository/proxy of the artifacts generated and used by the teams.
• It provides control on which open source repositories can be utilized by the team.
• Saves network bandwidth by reducing outbound traffic.

Apache Archiva is less appropriate for organizations where immediate support/bug resolutions are required.

Incentivized

GitHub is an easy to go tool when it comes to Version Controlling, CI/CD workflows, Integration with third party softwares. It's effective for any level of CI/CD implementation you would like to. Also the the cost of product is also very competitive and affordable. As of now GitHub lacks capabilities when it comes to detailed project management in comparison to tools like Jira, but overall its value for money.

Incentivized

• It's an open source project and therefore saves cost.
• It allows exchange of artifacts/libraries between different teams.
• It allows managing internal and external repositories with ease.

Incentivized

• Version control: GitHub provides a powerful and flexible Git-based version control system that allows teams to track changes to their code over time, collaborate on code with others, and maintain a history of their work.
• Code review: GitHub's pull request system enables teams to review code changes, discuss suggestions and merge changes in a central location. This makes it easier to catch bugs and ensure that code quality remains high.
• Collaboration: GitHub provides a variety of collaboration tools to help teams work together effectively, including issue tracking, project management, and wikis.

• Muti-tenancy was hard to achieve.
• UI can be improved. Its seems bit dated.
• It is a bit tricky to setup.

Incentivized

• Not an easy tool for beginners. Prior command-line experience is expected to get started with GitHub efficiently.
• Unlike other source control platforms GitHub is a little confusing. With no proper GUI tool its hard to understand the source code version/history.
• Working with larger files can be tricky. For file sizes above 100MB, GitHub expects the developer to use different commands (lfs).
• While using the web version of GitHub, it has some restrictions on the number of files that can be uploaded at once. Recommended action is to use the command-line utility to add and push files into the repository.

GitHub's ease of use and continued investment into the Developer Experience have made it the de facto tool for our engineers to manage software changes. With new features that continue to come out, we have been able to consolidate several other SaaS solutions and reduce the number of tools required for each engineer to perform their job responsibilities.

GitHub is a clean and modern interface. The underlying integrations make it smooth to couple tasks, projects, pull requests and other business functions together. The insights and reporting is really strong and is getting better with every release. GitHub's PR tooling is strong for being web based, i do believe a better code editor would rival having to pull merge conflicts into local IDE.

Incentivized

There are a ton of resources and tutorials for GitHub online. The sheer number of people who use GitHub ensures that someone has the exact answer you are looking for. The docs on GitHub itself are very thorough as well. You will often find an official doc along with the hundreds of independent tutorials that answers your question, which is unusual for most online services.

Incentivized

• Apache Archiva is a great choice for organizations with a limited budget.
• Alternatives are expensive to acquire Archiva comes offers REST API(s) which allows the creation of customized UI.
• With Apache Archiva, it is easy to manage the remote proxy repositories.
• RBAC helps with managing user access to the repository.
• Configuration can be achieved using UI and stored in archiva.xml.
• Backup of configuration is quite simple.

Incentivized

While I don't have very much experience with these 2 solutions, they're two of the most popular alternatives to GitHub. Bitbucket is from Atlassian, which may make sense for a team that is already using other Atlassian tools like Jira, Confluence, and Trello, as their integration will likely be much tighter. Gitlab on the other hand has a reputation as a very capable GitHub replacement with some features that are not available on GitHub like firewall tools.

Incentivized

• The impact of Apache Archiva on ROI has been positive. Since it is open source. It is free.
• It has allowed teams to store artifacts centrally, thus leading to a reduced need for multiple servers
• Security audits can be easily performed on the artifacts.

Incentivized

• Team collaboration significantly improved as everything is clearly logged and maintained.
• Maintaining a good overview of items will be delivered wrt the roadmap for example.
• Knowledge management and tracking. Over time a lot of tickets, issues and comments are logged. GitHub is a great asset to go back and review why x was y.

Incentivized