AWS CodeCommit vs. Sourcetree

Non-cloud users often complain about CodeCommit because it is so barebones, which it is. However, I believe that is by design. It is not supposed to be a full-fledged AI integrated GitLab alternative. Once users or developers get over the learning curve and required Cloud dependency, CodeCommit is a great service that offers a perfect complement / augmentation to on prem options. It is ideal for Cloud-native deployments where the code and production service are close together.

Sourcetree is a great tool for any Git user. Whether you're well versed using Git commands in the terminal or a newbie, this tool wonderfully supplements your workflow. A quick glance at the UI and you know where your project stands. I find it most helpful when I need to determine what changed in a particular file in past commits. Having a visual graph of branches helps me to understand the big picture. Even though I'm comfortable operating Git most often in the command line, I always have Sourcetree open to check my work and see where my colleagues are.

Incentivized

• Lightweight
• Native IAM integration
• Collaboration
• High Availability

• Merge Changes - helping you handle merge conflicts.
• Comparing branches.
• Visually showing various paths that existing branches are following.
• It is easy to import already downloaded repositories.
• And it integrates with Bitbucket (web), where I can click a menu in Bitbucket and have it download and import the repo to my local environment.

Incentivized

• Integration with non-Cloud services
• Learning curve for devs
• Barebones

• As an Atlassian product i'd have expected smart integrations/features with their other developer products like Jira or BitBucket, but this is not the case. It can sometimes pick up on Jira ticket IDs and show them as a label or as a unique piece of work to follow. But there's no actual integration to Jira and is just simple pattern matching.
• For the majority of developers it's just overwhelming and overkill. There's a plethora of metadata, supporting information, and many many actions/tools to help perform complex git actions. This is great if you're managing complex repos or need to perform an audit, but to the average user it's just not a user friendly experience due to how bloated it can feel.
• Very simple git actions such as 'git pull' have been massively overcomplicated. When pressing the pull button you get a popup with multiple dropdowns, checkboxes and settings on how you want to pull and the followup actions to run after the pull, both on the remote repo and local repo. It's just unnecessary and adding complexity where it's not needed.

Incentivized

It is one of the best Git GUIs out there, I have worked with multiple GUIs and this provides more insights and features compared to others, the Tree view and History helps keeping track and reverting commits, With help of different UI elements it helps the new developers to learn git using standards as well.

Incentivized

CodeCommit is a cloud native solution where GitHub is typically run on prem which requires a team to manage the physical servers and the software on top of it. CodeCommit is a better choice when doing Cloud focused workloads. GitHub Copilot offers more features than the leaner CodeCommit, however does not have the same integration options

Sourcetree allows seamless integration across all widely used GIT services and is cross-platform compatible. This client is capable of managing workflows of any difficulty and its cross-compatibility eliminates the need to use different or multiple GIT clients altogether.

Incentivized

• 20% reduction in traffic to on-prem GitHub
• No additional server capacity required
• No overhead or maintainance

• Makes using Git more pleasurable increasing developer happiness.
• Visual display of branches and commits with their diff helps me find problems quickly.
• Complex Git commands are only a click away using Sourcetree.

Incentivized