Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Gitblit vs RhodeCode, the Slant community recommends RhodeCode for most people. In the question“What are the best self-hosted web-based Git repository managers?” RhodeCode is ranked 7th while Gitblit is ranked 10th. The most important reason people chose RhodeCode is:
It's open source and it can be installed on your own machine, which gives high security and isolated environment for the codes. Whole application installation is super easy and independent from the Linux distribution.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Just works
Setting up is easy and usage is intuitive.
Pro Free and open source
GitBlit is free and open source (under Apache License) .
Pro Cross-platform
Gitblit is available for Windows, OS X and Linux.
Pro Built-in authorization in windows
So you don't have to worry about setting up OpenSSH on Windows.
Pro High security
It's open source and it can be installed on your own machine, which gives high security and isolated environment for the codes. Whole application installation is super easy and independent from the Linux distribution.
Pro Supports 3 major version control systems
RhodeCode supports Mercurial, Git and Subversion in a unified way that allows you to do code-reviews and other stuff on each of them.
Pro Centralized user management
User management is centralized around administrators which can give granular permissions to individual users or user groups/. These permissions can be related to allowing contributions, editing, or simply giving read-only access to users.
Pro Powerful and flexible code review
Code reviews can be done via Pull Requests, or simply commit-by-commit. There are voting rules, random reviewers pools, and smart comment invalidation logic. Pull requests are also versioned so it's easy to review partial changes after the author has updated his code.
When you create a Pull-request you can add set of reviewers. They all have to vote and approve the PR. There's some flexibility on how the voting is accepted, it can be majority wins, or all-agree. Good practice is to add BOT accounts like jenkins, that also will vote on the review, based on for example tests run, and can forbid a merge because of a negative vote. In addition users can leave special type of comments that will also prevent merges, aka TODO notes. Once TODOs are resolved a Pull Request can be merged.
Pro Free and Open Source
RhodeCode CE (Community Edition ) is free and open source. Enterprise Edition (EE) adds premium support, corporate authentication. and tool integrations on top of the RhodeCode CE.
Pro Integrates fully with LDAP/AD and others
RhodeCode has auth plugins, now supported include: LDAP, LDAP with user groups, TOKEN, Container auth, PAM
Pro Online editing with preview
Files can be added, modified and deleted from the web interface, including adding directories, and uploading files.
Pro Best in class permission system
RhodeCode have the most advanced Permission system on the market, allowing things like permission inheritance, permission delegation. All comes in a format that doesn't get hard to manage at scale.
Pro Header authentication plugin allows auth delegation to 3rd party systems
The builtin header auth can delegate authentication to other existing systems for further validation chain.
Cons
Con No code reviews
It's not possible to start any code reviews on Pull Requests
Con Access controls are repository-based
Built in access controls are not branch-based.
Con No Squash Merge
There is no Squash Merge functionality
Con No project admins
There's no separation between a system admin and a project admin. There's owners for projects, but to create a new repository one has to be a general admin.
Con Hard to maintain and upgrade
The documentation is not very clear and it's hard to troubleshoot if there is a failure.
