tl;dr After having used Gerrit for a longer time and switching to Bitbucket I can't help the impression that the latter sucks big time. I'm assuming it's because of some knowledge gaps on my side rather than the software itself and would like to use it as efficiently as I did with Gerrit.
Main problem: appending to current pull request and seeing its history
The thing I liked about Gerrit the most is how it presented changes history. You just git --commit --amend, push it and it appears as a new patch set. You can easily see which comments were added to which versions of your change, you can see diff between any two patch sets of your commit. When reviewing somebody's change in response to your comment you can just see the diff between the latest and n-1th change or choose the baseline to compare. I can't find anything similarly clear in Bitbucket. Does it have any feature like that or is my workflow wrong? What is the preferred method to iteratively work on a pull request with reviewers?
Other minor things
- Instead of Gerrit's useful "DONE" auto-comment, Bitbucket offers likes. Can it be reconfigured?
- Why can I comment only between lines? I'd rather comment sections as it's way easier to show the point. Sometimes you want to comment single character, sometimes a block of 4 lines.
- I can't view all of my pull requests across multiple repositories. Seriously?
- Why is Bitbucket hiding a new line at the end of the file?
I'm really trying to like Bitbucket but it looks like this tool is not created for/by engineers. I'd gladly trade pretty interfaces or JIRA integration for more useful diff tools or better review process. If anybody has similar experiences, I'd be glad to hear how you adapted your workflows from Gerrit to Bitbucket.