Apache Subversion is a version control option that is free to download and open source under the Apache 2.0 license.
N/A
GitHub
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
GitHub is a platform that hosts public and private code and provides software development and collaboration tools. Features include version control, issue tracking, code review, team management, syntax highlighting, etc. Personal plans ($0-50), Organizational plans ($0-200), and Enterprise plans are available.
After Microsoft Visual SourceSafe was discontinued, we chose Subversion and it was a great choice. We were able to migrate to Apache Subversion very quickly and easily and benefited immediately from its non-locking workflow (SourceSafe required users to "lock" the file when …
Git has become the new standard of version control, with its support for distributed design. As a tool to manage and control versions, Subversion does it well, but Git is the future.
We used Visual SourceSafe before SVN many years ago and we chose SVN at that time mainly because it allowed us to do collaborative work on the same source code. It also had improved conflict resolution when doing code merges, blaming changes etc, which improved the speed of …
Git is probably the biggest open source rival to Subversion. It's designed for distributed development, an environment I'm not very familiar with. I've only got some experience with it, and only as a user, and even that is limited. I had some trouble wrapping my mind around the …
Git is a newer version control system compared to that of svn. I think that svn is more stable, easy to learn/use, and not-so-complex as git. Also, svn has very good client applications which provide extremely user-friendly user interfaces. Apache Subversion is also open source …
Git is better than Subversion in every aspect except that is not free . But since our company has bought Git licenses and I would not go back to using Subversion .
GitHub
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose GitHub
Comparing between GitHub, GitLab and Mercurial, I felt real hard to work with Mercurial, since the application interface was really bad. Bug GitHub and GitLab windows applications were too great compared to Mercurial. If I have to compare between GitLab and GitHub, Most of the …
GitHub comes handy in terms of usage and capabilities, it is easy to use and quite a user friendly tools when it comes to user experience, with limited UI/UX and it has vast exposure when it comes to third party integration and being quite mature and yet evolving and popular …
Over my career I've used a variety of other platforms but always find myself coming back to GitHub which has always had the most forward thinking features, evolving faster than other platforms, staying on the cutting edge of AI and other tools as they are released. AI …
GitLab has strong code review and project management capabilities, but it has a smaller community. Better for cross-functional collaboration but less intuitive for nontechnical users.
GitHub compared to Gitlab and Bitbucket seems to have an easier and nice to use interface. This is mainly due to the fact that GitHub is the No1 choice for most of the Open Source projects. Developers out there are already famaliar to it's UX/UI and use it every day.
GitHub is primarily targeted at developers and open-source communities, while Bitbucket is geared more towards small- to medium-sized businesses. GitHub has a free plan for open-source projects, while Bitbucket charges a fee for private repositories. For organizations with …
GitHub is the best platform to manage your source code. You can manage your CI/CD with different cloud service provider platforms and different languages. You can also create GHE for a number of organizations and repositories. Learning GitHub is easy and simple and supports …
GitHub stacks up against all of its competitors due to its ease of use and great UI that tops the all. I selected GitHub considering its popularity greater developer community. GitHub also provides Student Developer Pack that we can use to enhance our knowledge and get up to …
While SVN comes with basic functionalities, TFS is a superior tool and often unused to its potential in most cases. GitHub brings that equilibrium. It perfectly works like a versioning tool and can also be used to create CICD deployment pipelines.
GitHub is distributed model while perforce is more centralised .i.e. Developers can easily download full change history. Git is better in terms of performance as it provides faster result. Also Git is open source and available free of cost. Git is also storage effective with …
One biggest reason is that GitHub is popular and used by many so it is easy to get contributions this also means that most people are already familiar with using GitHub. Gitlab does offer more features and has more rich pipelines with the free repository as well but GitHub is …
GitHub is awesome at it's own place. I'm using it from last 3 years and not used so Gitlab or Bitbucket so much. They are also having almost same features but i think one of then is free for multiple branches.
GitHub gives support for open-source applications. I think it has an easier and more reliable interface compared to other products on the market. You are able to expose your work via GitHub so that it can be used as a proof of your work to your current employer or future …
GitHub is the de-facto solution for version control and code storage. Our team prefers it over other options like BitBucket for its feature-completeness.
GitHub is at least as good as BitBucket, if not a little more refined. GitHub is hands-down better than TFS. If you are using TFS, you really need to move to a modern source control system. The newer Azure DevOps Server has a decent Git offering, but the UX is incredibly …
In the past, we used Beanstalk and were happy with it. Going forward, GitHub makes it easier for us to work with open-source projects and with new temporary developers who might not be familiar with Beanstalk.
Subversion solves our software versioning problem by providing tools for conflict resolution when doing collaborative work on the same files and projects. We use it with TortoiseSVN and it works great for some of our projects with smaller teams. However, we have a need to make code reviews more and it is a little more difficult to do that in SVN, compared to Bitbucket and Git.
I’ve worked with Github my entire career and view it as an essential part. As a Product manager it allows me to keep track of my features, epics, issues and QA. It is easy to set up and integrate with tools such as intercom or notion.
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.
Refactoring the layout of a respoitory--or a part of a repository--can be a bit painful, especially for users with workspaces associated with the affected part of the repository. Not sure what could be done to make that better, but it would be nice if something was possible.
Folks coming from Git can have problems using Subversion. Again, not sure anything can (or should) be done to address that, but it is occasionally an issue.
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.
While there are interesting alternatives, such a GIT, Subversion has been a breath of fresh air compared to its predecessors like CVS or Microsoft Source Safe (now called Team Foundation Server). Its ease of use and high adoption rate is going to keep me using this product for years to come.
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.
It's a testament to how easy it is to use GitHub and how many others use it that you can pretty much find the answer to any problem you have by searching online. Consequently, I've never needed to use their support. It's an incredibly easy tool to set up initially, so it won't require much onboarding expertise to get started.
After Microsoft Visual SourceSafe was discontinued, we chose Subversion and it was a great choice. We were able to migrate to Apache Subversion very quickly and easily and benefited immediately from its non-locking workflow (SourceSafe required users to "lock" the file when editing to prevent editing conflicts from other users, whereas Subversion allows multiple users to edit the same file simultaneously and then merge conflicts later.)
While we still use Apache Subversion for our legacy projects, we've migrated to Git and GitHub for our new projects as that is the new "cool kid" and it provides some benefits such as distributed and offline development. But Git is more complex than Apache Subversion and not as easy to learn.
GitHub comes handy in terms of usage and capabilities, it is easy to use and quite a user friendly tools when it comes to user experience, with limited UI/UX and it has vast exposure when it comes to third party integration and being quite mature and yet evolving and popular tool many other platform provide easy integration with the platform and make first choice for many tools architects.
It allowed us to deliver the right files to our customer without "clobbering" previous releases, making for a far more satisfied customer.
It allowed our developers to work on two releases in parallel (plus an occasional third, for emergency fixes).
With some simple hooks, it allowed us to set up a system where code was was automatically deployed to test servers as soon as developers committed it, making testing easier. This was made easier by virtue of being a ColdFusion project, which requires no compilation. However, that is possible for compiled code with a continuous integration system like Jenkins.
GitHub has made branching much easier for our dev team. Easy branching makes it easier for us to gain all the benefits of source control while giving us the flexibility to decide what features/branches we want to go in any particular release.
Integration with third-party tools like Azure DevOps has allowed us to streamline workflows and gain the benefits of automated testing whenever a commit is made.
GitHub has also raised visibility with its integration with our Sprint boards. We can easily jump to a commit from a work item.