GitHub Reviews

We are using GitHub as a repository for a couple of customers to be able to do Infra as Code in Microsoft Azure for them.

The most valuable features of GitHub are the ease of integration into Microsoft Azure DevOps. The process that you need to deploy into Microsoft Azure becomes fairly simple and the templates are already available, a lot of the engineers find it easier to use.

GitHub could have better integration or capability with other solutions.

I have been using GitHub for approximately four years.

GitHub is highly stable. Our team has not had any trouble with it.

The scalability of GitHub is good. I have not come across any limit.

We have six people using this solution in my organization. We have plans to increase usage.

I have not used the support from GitHub.

The initial setup of GitHub is simple. The full implementation took approximately a few hours. There was some user configuration that took some time.

We did the implementation in-house for GitHub.

 The licensing model from GitHub is very clear.

I recommend this solution to others. There may be some customers that are very picky about not having code on the cloud, and then my recommendation would normally be to use Microsoft Azure Repos, which is essentially a clone of GitHub but it stays within your subscription and within your tenancy on Microsoft Azure.

I rate GitHub a nine out of ten.

We use the solution when developing new code or modifying existing code, changes are tracked and other team members can review the code before production. 

The ability to track external changes to repositories we are using has been very useful for us. If we have a piece of code that's being implemented and it makes use of modules that we're calling externally from, let's say NPM, and a defect is found in one of those NPM modules, we're immediately alerted that a defect has been found in libraries outside of our code space. This enables us to keep in touch with defects that other people have discovered in the code that we're using. GitHub informs us as other users discover broken code, which allows us to deal with issues very quickly, without investigation on our part. 

The versioning of the code and the tracking of changes are definitely some of my top features. 

The ability to code reviews with peers.

The automatic checking to make sure that any of the code in my repository is not out of date with any modules that I'm making use of.

The solution could have better support for the Markdown language.

I've been using the solution for over ten years, probably since its beginning. 

The solution is very stable, they have been working on it for over a decade. 

The product is extremely scalable. We've seen applications that are hundreds of thousands of lines of code and it doesn't have any problems working with them.

I'm a contractor for the Department of Veteran Affairs, and we've easily got several thousand people making use of the code just within the VA itself. It's being used by almost everyone on a product development team, including project managers, testers, developers, and documentation specialists.

The support is very good. We make use of Slack for communication and we have dedicated technical support for GitHub right in our Slack, which allows us to get responses within minutes from their technical support team.

The initial setup was very simple.  

It really depends on the application we're working on. I've seen deployments take as little as 15 or 20 minutes to push out a code change, up to hours or days depending on the functions that we're changing.

We implemented the solution via an in-house team. 

Due to the cloud environment, we don't need anyone for maintenance, that's all done by GitHub.

We have an enterprise licensing agreement, and I am not part of the finance department so I can't say how much it costs. 

I would rate GitHub a nine out of ten. 

The implementation is a hybrid public and private cloud. GitHub in some ways is similar to NPM, but it is a code repository primarily for code versioning systems. It's all cloud-based and we just upload our code to it. There are functions within GitHub that will take and monitor the code that's uploaded and any NPM repositories that it makes use of, and confirms that your code is making use of the latest code repositories. Anytime there is a discrepancy or an upgrade to one of the code repositories, it lets you know what that upgrade is.

They're constantly making improvements to the environment, adding new features and functionality. The new features and functions that they're coming out with are available to me sometimes before I realize I even need them.

We use GitHub extensively with any new product we are developing and we're going to keep doing it that way. I would advise anyone to implement this solution. 

We are actually working with MuleSoft, and for that, we have to build our application. We are working for a company offering hotels and resorts. We are using GitHub for that process. We're building applications on it. 

It's good for branching and keeping the code. Overall, it is a good tool. We can find stable branches there and it is very easy to manage code there.

The interface is good.

We have found that it does allow for helpful integrations. 

It is really simple to set up.

They need to make it possible to recover branches. For any of the branch that does not have PR, that is unrecovered. So there should be an option to recover those branches.

I cannot recall coming across any missing features. 

The user interface on GitLab is better.

I've been using the solution for six or seven months. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. The performance is reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

We have 70 to 80 users on the product currently. We use it on a daily basis.

It's very easy to scale as needed. 

I've never directly contacted technical support. As a developer, I'm not the one who would be contacting technical support. If there were issues, someone else in the company would deal with them. 

I previously worked with GitLab. They are pretty much the same. GitLab does have a very good user interface. That's the main difference.

The initial setup is simple and straightforward. it is not overly complex or difficult. 

As it is a solution that is on the cloud, there is no manual maintenance required. 

We do have a separate team that handles deployment. I don't handle deployments directly myself. 

I don't deal with licensing. I cannot speak to the exact pricing. 

I'm just a customer and an end-user. 

We currently work with the latest updates of the product. 

I'm a developer and I don't work with managing everything on GitHub. I just use it for putting in the code and merging branches.

GitHub actually is a pretty easy tool. It is not very difficult to understand. It is very easy. Everyone can set up branches there or work on it.

I'd rate it eight out of ten. If we could recover branches, I'd give it a perfect ten. 

GitHub's workflow is smooth, and it integrates seamlessly with outside projects and libraries. It simplifies our entire development flow.

GitHub's source code management is top-notch. It's easy to inspect changes and visualize code and differences. Their action system is comprehensive in terms of making changes and automation.

GitHub's issue management could be improved a little from an organization standpoint. It would be helpful to have the ability to organize a work board or a backlog more comprehensively. For organizations migrating to GitHub from arbitrary systems, it's a little bit of a headache to move on to that system.

I have been using GitHub since 2009.

We've never had any performance issues with GitHub. I don't think we've had an outage yet and we've been on it for a number of years now. 

GitHub is extremely scalable. We only have about half a dozen repositories in there, but I know some organizations with hundreds working without issue. We're using it extensively. Everybody in the organization is using it, but it's fewer than 50 because our organization's pretty small. We'll increase usage naturally with time, but we're almost close to 100 percent, so it's hard to really increase usage at this point.

I read the documentation, but we haven't had any need for tech support.

We were using Azure DevOps previously, and we switched to GitHub primarily due to cost. The automated build platform is costly on the Azure DevOps side but significantly less expensive on the Azure side.

Setting up GitHub is extremely simple. You create an account in five minutes and have your first repository set up in another two after that. You're up and going in under 10 minutes.

It's a lightweight solution. The only maintenance is usually related to active stuff that we're doing on the platform. I wouldn't classify that as maintenance. That's product improvement.

We are a step above the base package. It's not the enterprise package. We're using the teams or the organization package. It has a few different names.

I rate GitHub nine out of 10 for overall ease of use and completeness in functionality.

I use GitHub for development, including version control and container services.

With GitHub, we can manage our development progress, CID, and continuous integration. It helps streamline our development processes effectively.

I really like the functions that GitHub offers. The features are very helpful for my needs.

There could be some improvements related to the automation of certain processes, especially with the integration of artificial intelligence. This would make some tasks more efficient.

I have been working with GitHub for more than one year.

I would rate the stability of GitHub as nine out of ten. It is very stable for our needs.

For scalability, I would rate GitHub nine out of ten. It scales well with our requirements.

The setup process for GitHub was straightforward and not complex.

If you are a start-up or a small company with a few projects, GitHub could be expensive because of the management costs.

GitHub is essentially a repository of code. It's where you source your code with the client and allows you to use Git. You get versioning and everything else for multiple deployments or codes. That's how we use it.

We stopped the development code on our machines, and we moved everything to GitHub. So, everyone is working on the latest code no matter what we do.

The accessibility is free.

There is room for improvement in terms of interface because  I had a problem with developers who didn't know what GitHub was, and it was a little bit strange to explain. 

I have been using GitHub for three years. We use the latest version. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.

The scalability is very good. It has never let me down.

The initial setup is okay. You need to know what you're doing.

I saw 100% ROI. 

Price is free. 

It is way better than developing software by yourself. I would definitely recommend using the solution.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We use GitHub for code versioning; with multiple developers working on the same projects. It gives us a central source for our code. We commit our code to the cloud using the API called Gita, which tracks which developers have uploaded the code, which have changed it and so on. 

The code versioning is excellent, and having a detailed log, including every change made to the code by every developer, is invaluable. It makes it so that if there is a bug or problem in the product channel, we can find exactly where it happened and how to fix it.

There can be conflict issues when two developers work on the same file or line of code, and it would be great to see that improved, possibly with an AI solution. 

A great feature would be the AI for code conflicts, enabling us to choose which code edit is the one we want to go with. 

I've been using the solution for about eight years. 

GitHub is stable, and they are improving in terms of security. 

The product is scalable. We have about 20 end users in total. 

The support is average; they can be inconsistent and it would be good if they were more responsive. 

Neutral

The initial setup is a little complex because it requires some knowledge of GitHub and code versioning. Certain steps need to be taken in a specific order, and if any are skipped or done wrong, it can lead to failure. Aside from the mentioned challenges, one staff member can complete the setup.

There is sufficient documentation to help with the setup process.

The setup was implemented in-house. 

GitHub is an open-source product, but when using the free-to-use version, anyone can see the code we're working on.

If you purchase a license, there's an option to make your code private, and our organization has a license.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

Compared to the competition, I would say GitHub is the best, as it has the most robust security, and most of the developer community is familiar with it. Bitbucket is also an excellent solution with solid security, but more developers would require training.

We are using GitHub for the development environment. After we develop some applications, we are pushing actually on both settings. 

I would like to see more security where a plugin was available for us to update in relation to security.

I have been using GitHub for the past seven years.

We are finding GitHub is very stable. Because it is the one that we are actually using on the cloud, it is easy for actual resources.

We currently did not choose the option with the subscription, but the free version actually provided by GitHub and GitLab is acceptable for us. Maybe the institution wants to increase the number of developers to twenty from what we currently have three, then definitely we will increase and prefer to have additional services from GitHub as well as GitLab.

Technical support is excellent on a scale of one to ten I give technical support a ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward and easy. For someone who has actually good experience in software development, including using a repository solution, I think it is easy. Beginners need to refer to the manual and see some online tutorials to receive assistance so that it is easier for them to setup.

You can do the deployment in-house without a problem.

We are currently paying nothing for GitHub.

I think I remember Tortu was the name of the product. There is a Q Balance in our repository providers. I think that one is Microsoft. I do not know exactly, but we are not using it. We tried it but we returned to GitHub.

If you are working in development I would recommend using GitHub. I would rate GitHub a ten out of ten.