Think long and hard before deleting this thread. Scrubbing this forum of evidence of so many ardent requests over a such a long period for something as straightforward and obvious as a Linux version of SourceTree WILL BE WIDELY derided in the developer world.
Historically, this dismissal of Linux developers is exactly why so many of us distrust Microsoft, Adobe and other closed-source shops. although they must be given credit for changing their tune recently in creating 100% open source apps like VSCode, and Brackets. This occasion would be a great opportunity for Atlassian to follow suit. And keep in mind, most of the upvotes here are merely asking for a Linux port, not for SourceTree source code to actually be publicly released.
I will never use an Atlassian product again. Deleting this thread without even preserving an archive shows how little Atlassian cares about its users. The overwhelming desire of Atlassian's users to have SourceTree on Linux has been completely disregarded, and it shows just how out of touch your company is.
I would suggest you contact the CEO's of Atlassian. Google for: Atlassian contact the CEO
I tried it, and got pretty much the same response from the same person who posted above (Rahul, product manager for SourceTree), so at least Rahul got the message I sent... I don't know if the CEO(s) actually received my comment, but if enough people 'Contact the CEO' perhaps the message will be heard.
I will repeat that this is a very strange position for Atlassian to take. Perhaps they are afraid of the competition from the likes of gitk, gitg, GitEye, giggle or Git Cola... All are free git gui's.
In fact, maybe one or more of those will replace SourceTree on the other platforms as well. I myself have certainly lost that loving feeling for Atlassian.
To be honest, I'm not surprised; every single issue that I've upvoted or watched has had the same basic reaction from Atlassian, no matter how simple it is to implement, or how many upvotes it has, or what the potential ramifications of the issue are.
While I love Atlassian products, they really do seem to do whatever they want, regardless of what the customer asks for. Which is rather a bit backwards IMO.
Some examples are:
Internet standard functionality bug:
Major Security issue (potential for FERPA violations, etc.):
I really loved using SourceTree when I was developing on a Windows machine. But recently I had to switch to Ubuntu, which I really like, but the main tool I miss is a really good Git gui. So I was a bit surprised when I found out that SourceTree is not available on Linux :(
"Seriously no Linux version planned? As many other teams, we use all 3 main OS here, we need tools that work on all of them. Learn from VSCode or Gitkraken, they do it right.'
Yep, quite unbelievable, in 2018.
Especially, from a company that makes money from running Java server applications on Linux servers. If anything, basic decency dictates to release your Git client for Linux.
It was a great time with SourceTree on Mac OS X, but macOS get's worse with every release since Steve is dead. I switched to Linux (first elementary OS and now NixOS) some years ago, also at work. I would love to be able to use SourceTree on Linux, but this 5 years old issue shows that Atlassian don't cares about the wishes of it's customers and i will not use their software again.
Now i use the integrated git UI in Atom editor for commits and terminal for more complex tasks.
I will delete my account here after this post.
Wait is this some sort of a joke??? You cant run this on Linux do people actually use windows to develop things I find that really odd.
Bunch of leftist Obama supporters most likely ohhh let me go download on my macintosh glug glug sooo diverse and posh.
Not worthy of supporting a reeeal president... Not worthy of Linux real machines, GitKraken sounds interesting .
We adopted JIRA, bitbucket, Confluence, etc. I am leading the way to dumping Windows. In my opinion, Mac is an expensive and tedious system. We don't use the old collaboration tools much anymore like MS Office. It was a last desperate move for Office to go online, but they've sealed their fate. Bye bye.
Expect the linux share to grow. Atlassian will be enabling the flight from Windows. Where will those users go? Linux beats Mac among professional developers on Stack Overflow. They are your market too.
"Windows Desktop was the most commonly used platform by developers, followed by Linux Desktop." --- Platforms, Stack Overflow 2017
Is it possible to use SourceTree with Mono or Wine, on Ubuntu 18+? I have had to use Linux for the first time at my new job and I have managed to use Navicat for MySQL with Wine, and Telerik's Fiddler with the Mono framework. Maybe someone who understands these technologies could port the Window's version of SourceTree?
You will have to revise your decision of not supporting SourceTree on Linux.
In the 2019 StackOverflow Developer survey, Linux is now measured to be used as the developer's primary operating system in equal share as MacOS (~25% both).
See the survey:
Given that the most loved technology is Linux among developers (see the survey) - by a large margin - this share will only grow further.
You are already late with your product development, these trends didn't start yesterday.
you people gotta be kidding us.Of all systems,you go type there with a straight face and give the Linux community the middle finger..like y'all don't learn from history.You can't shun Linux and prosper.those are mutually exclusive events right there.That said,I'm loving Gitkraken,and I hate monopoly,so,peace...
Tools like Unreel Engine 4 compile and run on Linux. It'd be nice to have a good Git GUI on Windows, Mac, and Linux. I would pick Sourcetree, but I guess I'll do Gitkraken. Gitkraken runs on all of those platforms.
Linux has been my primary OS since Microsoft wants to take too much control with Windows 10. Even so, I still have VSCode, MonoDevlop, clang, Blender, Audacity, and gcc.
There's no reason not to build for Linux. Do you really want to use a mac when it can give you root without a password?
+1 to any linux distro, the rest, the Community will manage to port to others, I think. Or at least make it usable with WINE please.
P.S. You see the label "I'M NEW HERE" ? I sign up here only for encouraging SourceTree developers to develop linux version. I believe "NEW ONES HERE" above did the same thing.
+1 for linux, too.
A friend recommended me that tool, but as it's not available for linux I just won't use it.
Makes me thinking: Are the atlassian hosted BitBucket and Jira instances so damn slow because I live between the mountains or is it because they host them on Windows Servers? Maybe I should search for a new shore on that topic as well.
OS isn't the issue. They're slow because they're bloated. Open your network panel in the dev tools and check out how much it's downloading before and after rendering, as well as how many external calls are made.
Customers notice every 10ms of time spent churning a page. Slow rendering is actually more harmful to a UX than slow response time.
I think Mac is FreeBSD, not Linux. But they're very close.
There's definitely more than just a UI port, but that isn't the reason this isn't happening. Atlassian isn't going to do it. They could have done it 6 years ago if they wanted to. They hinted at it, then abandoned the idea.
Also, we (as developers) could have just made a solid Linux version of it by now if we just tried and open sourced it. If we made it in Electron (or similar), we could make it cross platform with an entire community maintaining it and leaving the Atlassian anti-developer attitude in the past.
Mac's kernel is called Darwin, and it has borrowed heavily from the BSD family: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)
The core libraries behind Mac's and Linux's GUIs have absolutely no overlap at all, although there are cross-platform libraries that abstract this away.
Anyway, Mac and Linux are similar so far as they both have very rich, well-featured command lines in which to get real work done, and they don't suck down every little virus that comes along.
Given that Linus Torvalds (author of Linux) wrote GIT, it is astounding that Atlassian thinks it's okay to ignore Linux as a target platform for SourceTree. That is more tone-deaf than any politician has ever been. #knowYourRoots
I'm fully convinced that Atlassian doesn't care about developers at all. They only care that they're on top of the mountain of cash that they wouldn't have without developers. They're very short sided.
Atlassian is also sitting on a mountain of requests from the community for simple things like managing session timeouts and adding a way to highlight text in Confluence; something that all WYSIWYG have.
The trivial stuff Atlassian ignores makes me truly believe that they only care about 3rd party affiliates selling plug-ins and features Atlassian won't make (or remove from existing functionality).
The sole of this company is gone.
We don't want to run SourceTree to only be on Windows. SourceTree is for both the Mac and Windows (and for the last few years has been a Mac-only application). The Mac and Windows development streams are different. The Mac version is written in Objective-C and the Windows version in C#. We targeted the platforms specifically for the best possible experience by leveraging the platform-specific features.
We don't have any immediate plans for Linux, but that could change, just as it did for Windows. Right now we're focussing on making the Mac and Windows versions better.
For a full cross-platform framework, I would rather recommend having a look at Lazarus RAD IDE / platform. It works flawlessly on Windows / Mac / Linux, with a native experience. It recently came out as 1.0, and is one of the most underrated open source frameworks out there!
You see, big things rarely happen accidentally.
So, if this framework is less popular than Qt/GTK/WxWidgets/etc -- it does not mean it's bad. But it definitely means, that programmers prefer Qt/GTK/WxWidgets/... for some reason.
Probably, first reason is C/C++. C is the language of kernel and system programming, C++ is the language for networking and game development. You see -- a lot of people can use those frameworks, with their experience, without learning Pascal.
Second one is probably big amount of code samples, QA, handbooks and documentation.
That is undoubtely true!
At the same time, taken into account, the immense hurdle that cross-platform develoment is, for most modern frameworks, Lazarus seems to takes away a lot of those hurldes by the way it works great out of the box on all the main platforms.
Indeed, it comes with other hurdles, in the form of lacking availibility of up-to-speed developers and libraries. The question is which hurdle is the hardest to overcome.
Every time i see this i think the following. Who ever was in the discussion to go .NET and have two code bases to be a close to bare metal as possible ---- is an idiot.
Perhaps they also copy and paste code within the same code base instead of refactoring out common reusable base classes too, because it's that kind of mentality.
It is typical for people who do not plan to support multiple platforms. There are enough good cross-platform UI frameorks that would make maintenence on multiple OSes possible. It is obvious that this project did not have this as a priority form start. And NO this is not off topic, it is about why Linux does not have a port.
Personally, I don't know how anyone could say that Atlassian is (are) money scavengers. For one, they give their products away FOR FREE to ANY open-source development team. Second, they give their products away FOR FREE to educational institutions for use within the classroom (and discounted licenses for educational institutions for use by departments.) Third, they spend their internal resources create awesome products like SourceTree and give it away FOR FREE too. I'm sure I could keep going, but you get the point. I understand that there is frustration that it's not been ported to Linux yet. Believe me, I understand it every day when I log into my Linux laptop and don't have the functionality. But, I support Atlassian and their willingness to be so giving to the community. When they say that there is something blocking their development of a Linux version, but can't go into more details at this time, I accept that. It doesn't mean that I don't hope that they're able to resolve whatever is blocking the Linux port of the software, because I do. But suggesting that they're being money-grubbing folks is both unsubstantiated and counterproductive :/
The purpose of SourceTree (IMHO) is to pull Stash or Bitbucket to your desktop. When using SourceTree together with a supported Git server, and integrate that Git server into an issue management system, you have something extremely powerful. As we see with many many tools which are extensions of "the real product", those extensions are free. So, I feel SourceTree is and extension of Stash, and free makes sense. What you do is pay for Stash, and you get the desktop tool. Any OpenSource project that would take responsibility for SourceTree to run on Linux would need to make sure that the objective of the project remain to extend the functionality of Stash and Bitbucket. SourceTree is NOT a "Git Client". It is a "Bitbucket or Stash Client" (Ok, GitHub, too).... And if Atlassian gave responsibility of this objective to a third party group (a large open source community), they would probably lose control of the objective. There are many great Git Client's for Linux. But, Atlassian needs to know how many Linux users actually need a Stash and Bitbucket (or GitHub) Client. If it's too small a percentage, then we would have to ask ourselves how much money Atlassian (or any company) would be willing to spend on a product that would not return more real revenue (Stash or Bitbucket server licenses). I really wish Atlassian could find it in their heart to spend the money to make a Linux SourceTree. Although, I would understand completely if they felt there was no business requirement to do so.
I don't necessarily believe that it's a money-related issue. I spoke with Atlassian about this thread back a couple of weeks ago (see my comment on March 12,) and they said that they were very aware of the need for a Linux SourceTree client, but that there were some things that were blocking their ability to develop the client for the time being, but that they couldn't go into details. I could be wrong, but that, to me, means something besides money.
Do not waste Your time anymore to ask a LINUX version and move on to alternatives. This company created a good GIT client but they can not make it FAST, netiher they can develop .NET applications in MONO to make it compatable with Linux. One of the most used platforms for development is linux, we all known this. If they do not want to create a linux version after so many request, if they are not able top port it to MONO libraries, it says enough about their skills. Move on, it is waste of time with that company.
You know, if you follow this thread, you've saw thay they consider to provide us linux client. I suppose it's matter of time and allocating people. I don't know why, they don't use mono compatible libaries, but I'm sure, if they would consider to make from source tree a git hub project, the linux client will appear more quickly :)
We developed SourceTree native to Mac and native to Windows (they're two separate development streams) so we can leverage OS-specific features and keep it closer to the metal. In this respect, there'd be no need for us to use a cross-platform library if we were to develop a *nix version, we'd likely go native.
As always, lots of interest but we're very much focussing on Mac and Windows for the moment, that takes up the majority of our time.
(n.b. you can't run SourceTree under Mono as we use WPF, this has been regularly pointed out to us but it's a limitation. Perhaps Mono will allow support for WPF in the future, at which point it could run on *nix)
Kieran, I don't see why Atlassian doesn't allocate more resources to your team then! This "no we can't" attitude seems defeatist.
If something is showing this much demand and is creating this much interest in the company's brand, it would be to your benefit. Ten pages (and I'm sure more) of people showing interest consistently over the span of several years. Is it not Atlassian's failure to actually make a release at this point?
A user friendly and powerful git client like sourcetree is badly needed in the Linux space. I'm sure there are countless people using bitbucket and for-pay Atlassian services who use Linux.
I know this is an old question and Atlassian has responded to it before but I just want to add my name to the list of people who would really like to see Source tree on Linux.
I'm a FOSS, security software and games developer, working exclusively on Linux and I would KILL for sourcetree on Linux. Write it in C++ with QT5 or GTK+ and you don't even have to worry about not being native enough.
To make it even sweeter: if you make Source tree on Linux happen I will personally fly to your office and bake you a cake of the flavour of your choosing. Think about it...
+1 Linux. I'd be willing to pay $50 for linux license, since you abandoned us maybe money will motivate you. Although we like 'free and open source', for all the money I've saved not buying microsoft or adobe products, I am more than able to send you 50/license for great software. Keep that in mind. This is not an idle threat. I *will* give you money, believe it.
+1 for linux. +100 for open-source. I too would love to see a linux port of this. I've been using it on both Mac and Windows recently and it's a great piece of software. The suggestion of making it open source and allowing the linux community to "build it for you" is also excellent. There are a lot of talented people out there who I'm sure would love to help port it for Linux.
The demand has been proven, now it's mostly a question of resourcing really - we've seen a huge influx of users since the Windows port was launched and there's a question of when/if/how we can tackle another port. We'll certainly be discussing it but I can't make any promises at this stage.
What is the status? A lot of time has gone since you wrote that. I am about to switch from Mac to elementary OS and one thing what is missing is your good software! please provide a linux build and ubuntu package! if it is also free software, i would give you a lot of money. so everyone can, share, improve and hack on it. you can also sell GPL licensed software! https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html
This question/feature request went on for years before Atlassian tried to terminate it.
Let's all just use Gitkraken.
It's better. No, really. It's better.
I've used both and I was originally one that wanted SourceTree. I used SourceTree for years.
Now, all we need to do it get Bitbucket configured with a button for "Clone with Gitkraken" rather than the existing "Clone with SourceTree".
4 years later (and about 5 overall since people have started pressing Atlassian for SourceTree on Linux) seems that the good people of Atlassian are still shunning the most popular web development platform, but fortunately we have some alternatives that are better than SourceTree overall (more if you don't need better):
- ungit not necessarily the best function-wise but I love the graphical representation of branches, makes any flow crystal clear
- GitKraken no idea how I've missed this until now, much more friendly, easier to use and gorgeous
- cycligent great for functionality, not as friendly though
IntelliJ and their *Storm IDEs include a pretty ok git client as well
just about gitkraken, you can read this:
you may stay with sourcetree.
Now stuck with a mac so I use sourcetree but with linux gitcola and command line are perfect.
For me I was a huge fan of SourceTree, however I intensively developing apps on linux more than 4 years and there're few decent Git GUIs on linux compared to SourceTree. At least, I was thinking like that until quite recently.
Although the commercial licence price is not cheap, nevertheless, even on linux there's definitely a killer Git GUI client: Git Kraken. The app is free for personal use(obviously they're expecting a lock-in effect), so developer folks, let's abandon our desparate hope and let's live in a Git Kraken world.
The irony of a git client not made available on Linux is, to me, overshadowed by the irony of so many Linux users who don't insist on using git cli.
If the lack of SourceTree on Linux makes even one developer learn how to use the terminal, then I'm happy Atlassian never made it.
Level up, people.
I feel the same way about most GIT usability. For nearly all functions of git, I use CLI now. It's honestly easier in many cases.
But there are times when a decent GUI is just better. For example, when you want to view the graph is an easily filtered way, or if you want to do quick inspections for cherry picking. Though, in theory, if you're following GIT Flow and proper code cycle patterns, you shouldn't need to do that often at all.
I use a GIT GUI in my IDE for the super quick stuff like if I need to rebase from a commit I see in the log, or if I want to branch from another commit. But even that is pretty seldom. But in nearly all cases, I do commits, pushes, checkouts, etc from the CLI because it's just easier in many cases.
Though, I do have to say that I really like JetBrian's GIT commit/push GUI. Makes it really easy to step through all the changes and write up what changes were made so you don't forget anything in the commit message.