61–70 of 356 posts
I really liked Gitlab when last I tried it, but in the end I went with https://gogs.io/ instead. For a small-ish team this felt like the most straight forward self-hosted solution. Still missing LFS though, which sucks, but it's being worked on.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there anything we can do from our side? We're very interested in making it easier to integrate with GitLab, but also happy to invest some time into making existing integrations easier to set up. Our hope is that with time, it'll become obvious that when developing an application, you integrate with GitLab as well as with BB and GH.
Maybe create a plugin for Visual Studio, like GitHub does. Also try to work with JetBrains to make their GitHub plugin work with GitLab? The GitHub plugin is available during installation, both with Visual Studio and JetBrains products, which makes it much more convenient to use. Things like creating a gist from code in IntelliJ or PyCharm also work out of the box with github.
There are some plugins listed here [0], but we hope to have official plugins in the future.
Gitlab users: How many hours per year do you spend on doing maintenance for your setup? (servers, updating, backups, troubleshooting, etc.)
Some things are a little bit akward but BitBucket didn't had this, too:
- FF only merges is only EE (too bad that would be a really major selling point even for CE, squash button would be unnecessary)
- CI is a little limited compared to a full blown Jenkins - We hit a CI bug which still shows up "Running" Pipelines https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/19455
- Artifacts API is limited to everything or nothing
- CI Stages can be defined as trigger only but you can't have multiple triggers that starting different things (considering a production trigger and a testing trigger while you don't want the 'manual' thing directly in GitLab, especially when integrating into other systems makes this a flaw)
- No Custom CSS (yeah our logo isn't 72px x 72px...)
But then again BitBucket didn't had these things anyway so except the bug it's nothing that would've hold us back. Everytime you wanted a Feature for BitBucket, the guys said that there is/was an extension. How dare that costed a shitload of money which would even superseeded GitLab EE.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great, thanks. For the upcoming release (8.11, August 22nd), we're adding deploy keys with push permissions [0]. This would allow you to basically do the same thing. That said, that doesn't make it very clear that you can use these for this purpose, so I've added a note to re-evaluate these. We're also expanding OAuth scopes, potentially making it easier / more attractive to integrate [1]. [0]: https://gitlab.com/git…
Since I have your attention, something else that I think should be on your radar is creating/defining supported injection points in GitLab's UI. If you haven't done so, you should look at what Microsoft has done with Visual Studio Team Services. By providing supported injection points in GitLab's UI, GitLab will be able to signal to others, that they are a solution you can safely build on top of.
Right now, to integrate deeply, you'd have to go through the heavy-handed process of creating a service [0]. That then does allow you to do almost anything, but the barrier to entry for that is high.
I created an issue for your proposal and hope you can provide some more feedback on how this would work, ideally [1].
[0]: http://docs.gitlab.com/ce/project_services/project_services.... Services
What is the benefit of moving to Gitlab from Bitbucket (or Github) for private repos? Same feature set, Gitlab cost more per user and on top of all you have to run your own server? Am I missing something here?
I'll leave the marketing talk to less biased people here, but do note that: - you can use GitLab.com for free: unlimited public and private repositories, unlimited collaborators, free hosting of your Docker images, free hosting of your static site with any static site generator and free CI / CD - GitLab CE is fully open source (MIT Expat). You can easily install it anywhere you want.
a) Start charging for things that I'm used to having for free
and/or
b) Go bankrupt/get bought out by a company and disappear
Do you really sell enough enterprise licenses to give all the rest of this stuff away? From a look at your site, that's the only source of profit for your company that I can find.
As always, we're happy to answer any questions about GitLab.
I just finished an evaluation of Gitlab for our company and I'm blown away by all the awesome little touches that are geared toward productivity (merge requests that can be merged to a second branch with two clicks? yes please!). That said, I'm holding off for now because I'd love for it to replace both Github and our current ticketing system, and rather than doing two migrations, I'd rather wait a few months until y…
- https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/18687 - https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/20608
If you have ideas to improve the current vision, don't hesitate to join the conversation!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nothing is free in life. You should define free because it's border line a buzz word now.
You can use GitLab.com with no charge. It's free in the same sense as GitHub is free, except it also runs on open source software (well, GitLab EE, which is a superset of CE and has a proprietary license but is still developed and supported in the open unlike GitHub). AFAICT the "cost" is that you're effectively load-testing GitLab EE and help guiding the development of a commercial product. Plus you're giving GitLab…
We're thinking about charging for specific GitLab Runners in the future (think Mac Runners) or additional storage (we have a soft cap of 10GB per repo).
It's hard separating the different moving parts (gitlab, gitlab-workhorse, gitlab-shell+ssh, postgres/mysql, redis) but I think I will have a merge request ready soon enough :D