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.
Git is my favorite among all of the version control systems out there. It follows the Linux software philosophy of being built by many loosely coupled and small components that do one thing well. It's incredibly open, and its adoption in the open source community seems to be …
For us, we use both Git and GitHub so they were a package. I suppose you could use Git with another VCS/hosting service to track changes if it fit well enough, but for us we just went with design out of the box. We pay for the GitHub private repository for the extra security.
There are not many surviving alternatives for Git (maybe SVN) which in itself is quite meaningful. Git is the best versioning system of all time for programming, period. The difference between a good mathematical tool and sending .zip-s around emailing lists or FTP drives is so …
Git is the best Source Control Management Tool I've used. Every company, team, and project I've worked on professionally either used Git 100%, or was moving to Git, away from the alternatives like SVN. Git has all the features necessary, as well as a very large community of …
After using Subversion previously for a number of years, Git comes across as the new and improved source control approach. Git seems very suited to working with Agile:- branches can be created easily, allowing multiple developers to switch to them quickly, and having local …
GitHub is the ONLY version control system I've ever used. I used it from day 1 at Dev Bootcamp since they make a pretty big push for all students to learn git as a language and to use GitHub for version control. It is difficult to say how GitHub stacks up against the rest of …
Bitbucket has an interface that is much uglier and much more confusing to use. The learning curve is therefore much greater with Bitbucket. However, Bitbucket allows for free private repositories for small teams, which is a huge plus, and if your team is small enough, that …
GitHub holds up well against Gitlab and Bitbucket in terms of ease of use, documentation, support, and features for enterprise. However, it falls a bit flat on the pricing side with paid plans for private repos. It has been and remains the service of choice on which to post …
In my opinion, GitHub beats all of the competition.
The other services offer some things that could be considered benefits in some scenarios: Bitbucket has good integration with other Atlassian products, Gitlab is self-hosted and completely free, Beanstalk integrates with some …
Git and GitHub are so much easier to use. I didn't necessarily find the others that I've tried difficult, but they all had their quirks. GitHub has their quirks, but their quirks make sense once you really think about i. The other may or may not have command line options, …
The most direct competitor to GitHub that I can think of would be BitBucket from Atlassian. The biggest advantage that I know of for BitBucket would be that they support both git and Mercurial. If you have at least one team or project using Mercurial, then BitBucket would be …
Github and git, in general, is much better than SVN or Subversion for version tracking and code collaboration. It takes the best parts of SVN and fixes a lot of what was broken with it. Github's own UI has evolved really well over time and they have taken developer productivity …
We picked GitHub because it's what I was most familiar with when we started. We're testing out self-hosted Gitlab because it not only handles all the features we're using on GitHub, but it also has a continuous integration service which is currently implemented by a third party …
GitHub is the best git repository service available and the industry standard. It's fast, reliable, and constantly adding new services. Bitbucket and Gitlab are both good, free (or inexpensive) alternatives, but they lack some of the design and speed of GitHub. Both alternative …
Github has a much larger community of users than Gitlab, and its interface is slightly more 'clean' and easy to navigate. Github's brand name is also more recognizable and its users are generally very helpful and willing to contribute to exciting open source projects.
Along with Github, I've used Bitbucket and Gitlab. Bitbucket integrates with FishEye, which allows you to institute Code Reviews and create a viable merge process. Gitlab offers similar built in tools. With Github, I'm not aware of any similar features, but this is likely due …
I prefer GitHub on a personal level because it is free for personal use. It allows me to work on things with friends, or have easy access to open source software because of this.
[We selected GitHub because] It can easily integrate with different IDEs like Eclipse, Intellij and many more. Can fork and commit without any disturbance in the team; code conflicts can be easily resolved. Can easily monitor the changes made and revert if any bugs were …
Microsoft Team Foundation Server was too heavy and too complex for fast dvelopment. The integration with opensource build solutions (i.e jenkins) was not explored but the main feedback on this tool was its complexity. CVS and SVN used to be standards in past years and fit …
It's way easier to use and integrate with other applications as it was the first application that was created. Even though, I feel there has to be improvements on how to handle the branching in Github, with constant use I feel pretty much comfortable.
Atlassian's Bitbucket and SourceTree products are Git compatible and in our opinion offer a more intelligible and well-organized UI. These products integrate with JIRA for project management, but these features come at a higher monetary cost than GitHub.
GitHub is the only Git Repository tool I have extensive experience with. As a free solution it's a powerful tool. And with minimal investment you are able to create private projects as well, which has an incredible return on investment.
The sole reason we are using GitHub is because everyone else is. I would say Bitbucket and GitLab are steps ahead of GitHub, but everyone is on and using GitHub so we should as well. I'm not saying that GitHub is a bad choice, but there are other options out there that provide …
Cleaner web interface and higher uptime. Bitbucket offers free private repositories and more formal pull request review features, so it is preferred for private/internal projects, but GitHub is better for hosting open source projects.
GIT is good to be used for faster and high availability operations during code release cycle. Git provides a complete replica of the repository on the developer's local system which is why every developer will have complete repository available for quick access on his system and they can merge the specific branches that they have worked on back to the centralized repository. The limitations with GIT are seen when checking in large files.
GitHub is well suited for software development, GitHub is particularly well suited for software development projects, where teams need to collaborate on code, track changes, and review code changes. Also for open-source projects, GitHub is an ideal platform for open-source projects, where teams of developers from all over the world can collaborate on code and contribute to projects. For documentation, GitHub provides a platform for creating and sharing documentation, making it an ideal solution for teams that need to create and maintain documentation. On small and medium-sized teams GitHub is well suited as those teams that need to collaborate on software projects and track changes to their code.
As a repository it's great. It houses almost all the open-source applications/code that anyone can fork and play with. A huge collection of sample codes available with problem statements across different domains make Github a one-stop location.
I use GitHub with Windows and the Git Bash is superb. It [is] a powerful alternative to the Command Prompt and Powershell. Allows me to run shell scripts and UNIX commands inside the terminal [on] a Windows PC.
GitHub integration with almost all cloud development/deployment platforms is amazing. Deploying a new application in Azure is really smooth. Just link the GitHub repositories and it's good to go. From automatic build to deployment everything is just amazing.
When browsing history of a file, GitHub could make it easier to see the file after a particular commit instead of just being able to quickly view the commit. I'd like to be able to see the commit or the file itself in one click.
I would like to be able to view commits by user.
I would love to be able to traverse code on GitHub (go to definition, etc) - the good news here is that they are working on these features!
Git has met all standards for a source control tool and even exceeded those standards. Git is so integrated with our work that I can't imagine a day without it.
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.
- Easy to use compared to other version control software. UI interface makes it easy to use, as well as protects against making a major mistake by deleting code, etc. - UI looks modern. - Support for multiple platforms, which I assume will only get better with time. - Student benefits are awesome! - The size limitations on their repositories make sense to me. Not too crazy but realistic from a business perspective.
I am not sure what the official Git support channels are like as I have never needed to use any official support. Because Git is so popular among all developers now, it is pretty easy to find the answer to almost any Git question with a quick Google search. I've never had trouble finding what I'm looking for.
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.
I've used both Apache Subversion & Git over the years and have maintained my allegiance to Git. Git is not objectively better than Subversion. It's different. The key difference is that it is decentralized. With Subversion, you have a problem here: The SVN Repository may be in a location you can't reach (behind a VPN, intranet - etc), you cannot commit. If you want to make a copy of your code, you have to literally copy/paste it. With Git, you do not have this problem. Your local copy is a repository, and you can commit to it and get all benefits of source control. When you regain connectivity to the main repository, you can commit against it. Another thing for consideration is that Git tracks content rather than files. Branches are lightweight and merging is easy, and I mean really easy. It's distributed, basically every repository is a branch. It's much easier to develop concurrently and collaboratively than with Subversion, in my opinion. It also makes offline development possible. It doesn't impose any workflow, as seen on the above linked website, there are many workflows possible with Git. A Subversion-style workflow is easily mimicked.
At the time to evaluation - Bitbucket was very tightly integrated into Atlassian’s suite of tools. For an organization that is starting out and looking to spend limited funds effectively - the cost/benefit of using that suite of tools usually doesn’t make sense. Granted things may have changed since then (its been over 5 years) - but at the time GitHub was effective - and all prospective engineers knew about it and already had accounts. This made it very easy to add to the organization and not lose time in training, etc. Developers seem to really love GitHub above most other tools out there - so that plays into the decision making as well.
Git has saved our organization countless hours having to manually trace code to a breaking change or manage conflicting changes. It has no equal when it comes to scalability or manageability.
Git has allowed our engineering team to build code reviews into its workflow by preventing a developer from approving or merging in their own code; instead, all proposed changes are reviewed by another engineer to assess the impact of the code and whether or not it should be merged in first. This greatly reduces the likelihood of breaking changes getting into production.
Git has at times created some confusion among developers about what to do if they accidentally commit a change they decide later they want to roll back. There are multiple ways to address this problem and the best available option may not be obvious in all cases.
Github has increased our rate of code development, increasing our publishing rate. This helps bring attention to the research we are doing and ultimately brings in more funding for further research.
Because GitHub makes my team more efficient, we are able to put more hours into code development / report writing rather than agonizing over different versions of code created without version control software.
We use a paid version of GitHub, because we work through private repositories, but the increase in productivity, efficiency, and research progress is definitely worth the price.