Which are the pros (and cons) of self-hosting your repositories (in other words: GitLab vs Bitbucket)? [closed]

Question

I have to decide between Bitbucket and GitLab for repository hosting (yes, they have to be private). I've used Bitbucket in the past, but now I've discovered GitLab and I find the idea of having a self-hosted repository manager quite attractive. But, I have to justify the use of one of them (especially in the case of using GitLab, because of the overhead that supposes its installation and configuration).

We have to take into account the following considerations:

• I'm not sure about the backup frequency of the server where GitLab would be installed in (I think this would be a mayor difference between the two options, but I don't know if Bitbucket assures 100% the integrity of the repos they host).
• I can have access to the server from anywhere with VMWare Horizon Client, so Bitbucket and self-hosted GitLab would be tied in this point.

So, which are the reasons I should opt for self-hosted repo manager (GitLab), instead of non self-hosted one (Bitbucket)?

Iceskate

Gitlab is not easily installed on Windows/MacOSX systems. Bitbucket runs everywhere. Both have similar capabilities. That should make the decision easy based on your available hosting systems. You should also consider the amount of time available that you want to spend administrating any issues (updates), etc. if you choose Gitlab. I did a quick review and would stick with Bitbucket, based on Gitlab not being ready for primetime. Will reconsider later. – Apathetic

Answer 1

I’ve used self-hosted repos in some occasions:

• Government work. They had strict security policies and a really big team. They also had remote access for some users.
• Pharmacy lab, also strict security and big team but no need for remote access though.
• I also keep a home git server for a large range of projects from hardware (Raspberry Pi), to Dockerfiles for Pentests, and complimentary services.

My Pros:

• Flexibility for your git server code (custom integration and modules).

• Flexibility for your infrastructure.

• Security - depends on your organisation

• Internet connection independence

• Speed - depends on your network of course but in my case (Gov work) working on site was much faster.

• Data - containment and accessibility depends on you organisation

My Cons:

• Its usually a better fit for large teams because of the different tasks required to maintain it.

• Security - continuous monitoring just in case your neighbour gets curious…and lucky.

• Maintenance - to keep up to date with new functionality you’ll have to be upgrading periodically

Hosted:
I also like the private repo functionality from both Bitbucket and Gitlab just take into consideration that Gitlab doesn’t cap user quantity. Also if you use CI Gitlab has it integrated.

Best of luck

Brashy

Something you missed here, not having to worry about GitLab's constant unscheduled downtime and background queue blockages. Been the bane of my existence recently. – Vaisya

I'd bet that in actuality, "better security" would be had from a managed host. – Binturong

Answer 2

Control. When you run open-source software yourself nobody can reach in and remove a feature that you rely on, or prevent you from extending the software to more exactly meet your own needs.

Dryad

And, in your opinion, it's worth having that control, taking into account the overhead its configuration supposes? – Iceskate

Correct. The hardware requirements are minimal, and since you're only doing private repositories you can leave it entirely inside your VPN rather than exposing it to the world. This should result in only incremental cost increases. – Dryad

Answer 3

It gives you more confidence in repos being actually private, allowing 3rd party to have your sensitive data may be a showstopper sometimes (or if you just prefer to be more paranoid). You can have any backup policy you like, for example - encrypt and upload into multiple clouds

Also for lot of repositories (and/or large ones), big team - self hosted may be cheaper, it does not require that much effort to maintain once you're settled with settings and features. You can set up gitlab, automated backups, monitoring of the former two in a few hours and then only check if everything still runs fine once in a while.

I have gitlab set up for my private projects, after initial setup it required no attention over a few years already

Rebuke