Side by side
BitKeeper vs Fossil
Both stand on version control software. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.
Free plan LinuxMacSelf-hosted+1
BitKeeper combines distributed version control with repository organization and large-file support. Consider the maker’s project-fit caveat and review the available demo before adopting it.
Visit BitKeeper Free plan LinuxMacSelf-hosted+2
Fossil combines distributed version control with a web interface and project tools in a self-contained package. Its listed limitations include no file locking, large-file handling, sparse checkout, or nested repositories.
Visit FossilThe facts
| BitKeeper | Fossil | |
|---|---|---|
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | Not published | Not published |
| Runs on | Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Windows | Linux, Mac, Self-hosted, Web, Windows |
| Lowest paid plan | Free or on request | Free or on request |
| Plans published | 1 | 1 |
| Maker | Not published | Not published |
| Website | bitkeeper.org | fossil-scm.org |
| On version control software | #6 of 62 | #10 of 62 |
BitKeeper: what it does well
- Free under the Apache 2.0 License.
- Supports Windows, macOS, Linux, and self-hosting.
- Includes native large-file handling and sparse checkout.
- Offers both command-line and graphical tools.
What to know first
- The maker says it is not the best choice for every project.
- The download page refers to cloning the last released source.
Fossil: what it does well
- Combines version control with bug tracking and project tools.
- Built-in web interface includes timelines and full-text search.
- Distributed as a single self-contained executable.
- Supports HTTPS or SSH network communication.
- Free under a 2-clause BSD license.
What to know first
- No file locking.
- No large-file handling.
- No sparse checkout or nested repositories.
Alternatives to BitKeeper Alternatives to Fossil The whole list