Bitbucket Server (discontinued) vs. Plastic SCM

Bitbucket Server would be good to use if you are not extremely reliant on the availability of your code at any given moment. If you have other systems relying on the up status of Bitbucket Server that can cause problems if unable to reach it -- you might consider going with a different product

Incentivized

Plastic SCM is well suited for the distributed development environment, where branching and merging can easily be handled. Its a good tool for version controlling, especially for a big team which is contributing to a big project simultaneously. Situation where Plastic SCM is not at all well suited are : If the project is smaller one and need to be handled by couple of people. So in that case setting up Plastic SCM and educating people to work on it is not at all efficient

• Pull requests / code reviews are simple but effective - it's easy to discuss the changes and enforce quality gates (through integration with Bamboo)
• The access control model is fairly granular, with per-branch and per-action permission configuration options
• There are various plugins available to extend functionality, such as SonarQube

Incentivized

• Version Control
• Organizing Workflow
• Transparency

Incentivized

• Bitbucket Server (formerly Stash) should be evaluated for implementation based on the capacity of the environment ownership and support.
• Insights and analytics reports are basic.
• Bitbucket Server (formerly Stash) as part of Atlassian tools has some restrictions for centralized user management.

Incentivized

• Interface
• Documentation
• Learning curve
• Unity integration

Incentivized

Because we're so locked in, it's likely we'll be using Bitbucket Server for a while, unfortunately.

Incentivized

The usability of its interface is pretty straight forward when it comes to creating projects and repositories, but when you have to dive into finer grained portions of the UI things can get tricky. If you are used to using tools like GitHub or Gitlab -- Bitbucket is just different enough to be a bother.

Incentivized

Never really needed any support as the application is very easy to set up and maintain. Any questions we had were well documented in their online documentation, and community forum.

Incentivized

Stash was selected before I was at the company, but we're looking at these alternatives and actively considering switching. Stash seems to have all the necessary features we need to make it work, but it doesn't have any bells and whistles or extra special features that we can use to create more advanced integrations with other products like Jenkins or Amazon Web Services.

Incentivized

Plastic has best integration with unity - zero issues, native, straightforward. GitHub feels more stable but for smaller and or indie teams plastic s version control feels much more under control - you click, you feel safe. moreover, there is no need for extra tools such as gitkraken, gitlab, Sourcetree, fork, etc. it is really easy to develop games this way.

Incentivized

• Stash has certainly improved the productivity of the team. We no longer have to use Shared Drive on network which is prone to hacks and errors to manage our code.
• During the process of releases, the release engineering team can pull the latest and approved code from Stash and need not be dependent upon the availability of the developers during their non availability. It improves productivity and fastens the ETA for requests.
• We have stayed on course for project deadlines since introduction of Stash and helps us achieve the goals of timely completion of projects.

Incentivized

• Easy to use
• Cheap
• Better than git for us
• Artists love it

Incentivized