Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

That may be the case. However when such tickets are open for 6-7 years with no update the general viewpoint everyone I know that uses Bitbucket has is that it will never be a priority to Atlassian.

Adding things like large file storage support is cool, I guess, but when you never use it its rather a case of appearing to prioritize certain market segments over others.

I know I've read the article that states how you prioritize, with a major one being usage patterns. But I wonder just how accurate a metric that is given in my specific group, we've started to avoid using the review tooling in bitbucket because its almost impossible to use to accomplish the goal.

Unless the idea is for Bitbucket to have a completely minimal set of features and for anything useful to pay license fees for plugins I can't quite make sense of how the priorities are decided.




I think you've hit on a really important point. In isolation, a particular suggestion might be something of a papercut with a workaround. An unwanted pull request, for example, isn't going to stop others from getting their work done. But, if there are enough of these things that happen to affect a team together, it all adds up. It sounds your team is in that boat, and people not wanting to use the review functionality is a serious concern. Whether or not that's uniquely the case, I'd love to discuss further to make sure I properly understand your experience. If you're willing, please email me (rbarnes atlassian com) and we can set up a call.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: