I'd like to send out my sympathy for any team members at companies moving <i>to</i> BitBucket. Good luck.<p>In my experience the offerings of GitLab are far better
Bitbucket is horribly antiquated (along with all Atlasssian software IMO), why not go to GitLab - it's code management, merges request workflows and discussions are excellent for peer review and the CI/CD is fantastic.
I don't know if somethings going on, but the last couple of weeks, Bitbucket has been incredibly slow, with pull request merges taking minutes for a tiny (< 14Mb) repo.
Their<p><pre><code> This pull request is being merged in the background. This typically only takes a few seconds but may take longer. You can safely navigate away.
</code></pre>
banner is now completely familiar to our dev team. I've seen the merge sometimes randomly fail (refreshing that screen causes the "Merge" button to reappear and the pull request state showing as "Open".
Why would you <i>ever</i> willingly choose bitbucket over Gitlab?<p>Does Bitbucket offer syntax highlighting when reviewing code changes yet? When we used it (before migrating to Gitlab) you had to install a third party browser extension.<p>What a joke.<p>Edit: nope, not yet: <a href="https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/BCLOUD-8673" rel="nofollow">https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/BCLOUD-8673</a>. Opened in 2014.
Ethical concerns aside*, I far preferred Github to BitBucket. Bitbucket has been incredibly unstable for the last few years that I've been using it at work. I regularly see the "We're experiencing issues..." banner when I review pull requests. We don't use bitbucket pipelines, but they seem to be the most unstable part of the product. I haven't used Gitlab in years so I can't give any up-to-date commentary on that as a solution. I've never had issues with Githbub and I quite like their UI so that will be my preference for the foreseeable future.<p>*I appreciate this is a big caveat
Step 1: Don't<p>The only thing bitbucket has going for it is that it's the same biller as all the other mediocre software you're using most days. It's pretty awful.
There isn't anything GitHub or/and Bitbucket specific to this. That's just the procedure to copy (clone/push) a repo from one Git server to another. What about issues, PRs, actions, wiki, ...? GitHub isn't only used to host the code alone.
Migrating from github: Sure, lots of reasons why you might want to do that. Just being sure you <i>can</i> has value.<p>Migrating to Bitbucket: Uh....<p>I don't really see any way in which Bitbucket is better than Github. Or, frankly, any other alternative. It exists due to inertia and/or to serve people irrevocably emeshed in the Atlassian ecosystem. I can understand why you might not have switched away yet, but switching <i>to</i> it?
It usually better to migrate git repositories with git clone --mirror than attempting to not forget refs with ad-hoc commands. For simple repositories their methods will probably work anyway, but it is still harder to do.
My company has moved from gitlab to bit bucket. It feels like a huge step backwards. It's good to hear that I'm not alone in such impressions. I was afraid it was just me disliking change.
Friendly reminder that BitBucket does not have a SLA:
<a href="https://confluence.atlassian.com/bbkb/what-is-atlassian-s-bitbucket-cloud-sla-uptime-support-etc-447644045.html" rel="nofollow">https://confluence.atlassian.com/bbkb/what-is-atlassian-s-bi...</a><p>... and it is down a lot.
The killer feature of Bitbucket over GitHub was that they hosted Mercurial repositories. Since they stopped doing that and deleted all my Mercurial repos I haven’t seen any reason to use them.