Add to Chrome
Add to Edge
Add to Firefox
Add to Opera
Add to Brave
Add to SafariWhen comparing Fossil vs BitBucket Issue Tracker, the Slant community recommends Fossil for most people. In the question“What are the best self-hosted bug trackers?” Fossil is ranked 3rd while BitBucket Issue Tracker is ranked 14th. The most important reason people chose Fossil is:
Fossil includes source code management, bug tracking, a wiki, and technotes. It even includes its own web server, though it can fairly easily be incorporated into other webservers.
Specs
Question Ranking
Pros
Pro Very complete
Fossil includes source code management, bug tracking, a wiki, and technotes.
It even includes its own web server, though it can fairly easily be incorporated into other webservers.
Pro Self-contained
A Fossil repository is contained in a single file.
Pro Cross-platform
Fossil can run on Linux, Mac, BSD derivatives and on Windows.
Pro Very easy to configure as self-hosted
Single, stand-alone executable, including web server.
Pro Needs very few server resources
Since Fossil is a distributed VCS on top of being a bug tracker, it needs very few server resources.
Pro Free for up to 5 users
You can use BitBucket for free if you have 5 or less users (or try it out for free). Price brackets are for 10, 25, 50, 100, or unlimited users (it costs $1 per user per month, or $200 for unlimited users).
Pro Native application for both Mac and Windows
Atlassian, the company behind BitBucket is also behind SourceTree, a free application for Windows and Mac wich works as a client for both Git and Mercurial which can be connected to BitBucket and other code hosting services.
Pro Supports both Mercurial and Git
Has full support for both Mercurial and Git VCS.
Cons
Con Only a web interface or CLI
Fossil's bug tracker only works with the web interface or the command-line interface. There's no native GUI client supporting it.
There are some independent GUI clients out there, but none of them support Fossil's full range of abilities.
Con Integration with other tools is not as good as github
Most of the 3rd party tools ( bug trackers, CI servers, chat servers, etc) always integrate with GitHub first, and either don't integrate with Bitbucket at all or do sub par job in it. For example there are 3 separate projects to allow building and verifying pull request submissions on Jenkins CI server and there is only one viable one for BitBucket and that one is really buggy and lacking many features.
The only exception to this rule is Atlassian products like Jira.
