Atlassian Blog

Thanks for the reply mentioning us! There’s quite a few independent developers selling their add-ons in our Atlassian Marketplace with yearly bookings of anywhere from a few thousand $$ to over $1,000,000 in some cases. Some have even been acquired by larger partners who double down on investment and now what started as a solo thing is effectively a big startup. We think it really makes sense and is a great option for developers to consider.

Here’s a couple of examples we wrote up: Atlassian Marketplace developer Wittified, a successful solo dev business, acquired recently by AppFire https://www.atlassian.com/customers/wittified. Atlassian customer Twilio, who use several add-ons from such developers and they talk about how it really makes their Atlassian products more valuable https://www.atlassian.com/customers/twilio-case-study.

There’s Bob Swift Software, a long-standing solo independent developer who started with us years ago and who has tens of thousands of customers, also acquired by AppFire. Theres’s our Marketplace developer eazyBI, a reporting tool started as a side-project by one person and now a profitable company with 7 employees. There’s even agile planning features now part of JIRA Software itself, which started as an add-on known as Greenhopper from an independent developer that we ourselves acquired some years ago. And these are just some of the smaller, solo and indie devs. The larger business that emerged on our platform are something to behold (one…

DVCS does not discourage Continuous Integration as long as the developer pushes remotely on a regular basis to their own branch and the CI server is setup so that it builds the known active branches.

I've been working on solving this problem over the last year. We added the ability to Bamboo (CI server by Atlassian) to detect new branches as they are created in the remote repository and automatically test the merge with master and optionally push the branch to master if everything is OK. If the merge or the tests fail, Bamboo lets you know immediately via email/XMPP/HipChat/etc.

Yes, it relies on developers being disciplined (read: responsible and professional) enough to push back to master in order to have the merge tested and the tests run.

Developers actually do it though because the benefits to having their feature branch tested regularly against master are huge: code is regularly merged and tested with master to ensure integration state and other team members are isolated from changes that can potentially damage development velocity.

Anyhow, if your interested in learning more, see my blog post called "Making Feature Branches effective with CI". I'd love more comments and thoughts if you have them.

http://blogs.atlassian.com/2012/04/bamboofeature-branch-continuous-integration-hg-git/

Disclaimer: I am product manager for Bamboo @ Atlassian

This is interesting. I never thought of using vim commands to power the browser, but I do love text interfaces. (I type 150 wpm's and find keyboard navigation markedly faster than the point-and-click interface -- especially since keyboards are so much more precise.)

In 2008, back when I used Firefox, Mozilla tried an experimental interface called Ubiquity[0]. It was awesome! I don't know if the plugin still works, but I think text interfaces are really the way of the future for power users (everything old is new again)? Has anyone found anything quite like Ubiquity for Chrome or something like Vivaldi?

Other examples that come to mind: ChatOps[1] (seemingly popularized lately by Slack), Alfred[2], and even OS X's own Spotlight[3].

Nowadays, though, I just rely on the default keybindings of Chrome for most things. One of my favorites is Cmd+L, which highlights the contents of the address bar.

[0]: https://wiki.mozilla.org/Labs/Ubiquity

[1]: http://blogs.atlassian.com/2016/01/what-is-chatops-adoption-guide/

[2]: https://www.alfredapp.com/

[3]: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204014

I think the question betrays the authors bias and assumes too much; by claiming that "almost every article comparing mercurial and git" and saying "it seems like Mercurial has a better command line UX", the author is obviously a fan of Mercurial; neither of those points seem to be true. While I can understand the sour grapes at seeing an "inferior" technology win, it's not that clear cut. I haven't used Mercurial enough to really compare, but I can say that most of the supposed "advantages" of Mercurial versus Git seem moot to me. The CLI "UX" differences are negligible, it doesn't matter what languages they are written in, and git is ultimately more flexible due to less dogmatism.

Perhaps the question should be closed with an "already answered" link to this: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1598759/git-and-mercurial-compare-and-contrast

Edit: Followup with some more links:

http://schacon.github.com/2008/11/24/on-mercurial.html

http://tomayko.com/writings/the-thing-about-git

http://blogs.atlassian.com/2012/03/git-vs-mercurial-why-git/

Great to hear you're already using JIRA and Confluence. Adding Bitbucket to the mix will give you access to a bunch of great integration features.

We've been working on making it easier for the entire development team to collaborate and give them the right information at the right time. Here is a selection of features that I think you will find useful:

JIRA's Release Hub, to let you know if you're ready to release or not: http://blogs.atlassian.com/2015/04/jira-6-4-release-confidence-sanity

The development panel, to turn every issue into a dashboard for it's development work: http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/03/visualize-development-jira-6-2/

Automated issue transitioning, because it's easy to forget to move that issue to "In Review": http://blogs.atlassian.com/2014/08/jira-6-3-untangle-development/

Hope this helps. For a good overview, you can also take a look at the documentation that outlines the above integrations: https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/BitbucketServer/JIRA+integration

> For anything common, a CLI is almost always quicker and more consistent.

I'm also a command line fan, but when it comes to git there are 2 areas where a GUI is nice:

- After slashing through dozens of files, it's nice to have a nice GUI that gives you a list of all changed files, and manually select the lines you want to stage. I use git-cola (https://git-cola.github.io/) or git extensions (https://gitextensions.github.io/, although there's no screenshot of this exact functionality) depending on the platform I'm on

- When I need to explore a repo's history, I like having some interactivity: filtering branches/tags, quickly searching for a commit or its ancestor, search where a commit is included... the git cli is absolutely not the right tool for that.

I could get used to tig (https://blogs.atlassian.com/2013/05/git-tig/) because it fits the bill for both cases, I just haven taken the time. Sometimes a mouse may be the best tool.