Assembla vs. Atlassian Bitbucket vs. Mercurial

Assembla works well when you are working with multiple groups or entities. We dealt with different time zones, different levels of involvement with the projects, etc so this allows for us to have responses back in a quicker fashion. It also helps us clue in the appropriate people and rely less on following multiple email chains

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

If you generally think that to develop software you have to choose one repository, then in my opinion you have to choose between Mercurial and Git, there is not other solution. Mercurial also has a good merge tool which i can recommend. This gives you the flexibility to push just the "part of the feature", and is much better suited in the case where the "part of feature" and some other "part of the feature" both contain changes to the same file.

Incentivized

• Assembla assists in the workload balancing of our programmers.
• We are able to use Assembla to manage sprints and sprint planning in our agile format.

Incentivized

• 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.

Incentivized

• Branch
• Distributed architecture
• Stable
• Platform independent

Incentivized

• The ability to export the tasks or run metrics on them.
• Mobile ability.

Incentivized

• The code management UI is a bit rough around the edges and difficult to work with.
• BitBucket does not have the same simplified PR management tools as other competitors.
• It's not as easy to integrate 3rd party apps as other competitors.

Incentivized

• Integration with visual studio
• More integrated tools
• When I install Mercurial I always have to do a hard restart of my computer.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

We selected Assembla because the ticket functionality worked well with our agile planning format that we use company wide.

Incentivized

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.

Incentivized

When we chose Mercurial it was more popular from perspectives than Git and we have too many problems with the Microsoft team foundation solution. We also want to move from a centralized version of source control to a distributed one. We also were working more and more via the Internet with our source control so distributed version was only solution.

Incentivized

• We were able to spend less time tracking down the status of projects.
• We could become more self-sufficient on reviewing prior resolutions to help with current problems.
• Tasks were responded to quickly because we did not have to email one person, wait for an out of office email and then try someone else. Our task got assigned to the next available person.

Incentivized

• It's allowed for a lot of automation in terms of development workflows. It lets us pursue CI/CD approaches and get releases out faster
• It has let us get our infrastructure configuration into VCS, which further improves our automation abilities.
• It has aided in keeping track of changes, and allows us to keep workflows organized so we can track the status of development

Incentivized

• Improve time in merging
• Branching enables us to keep separate version per customer
• Good tool for programmers is sometimes a reason to stay

Incentivized