Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

about.gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 107 posts

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#41

Post by williamchia »

kuschku wrote: post #13
gtirloni wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems this feature is only available in the Premium plan, if you're hosting your own instance. It's free if you're using GitLab.com with a public GitHub repository. https://about.gitlab.com/features/github/ -- "Large Enterprises"

Oh fuck that. I’m a student using this to host open source projects, I’m not going to pay more for GitLab than I pay for all my servers and software combined. I’ll just hack it in there myself then, like I had to put some of the other "premium" features in myself. Long-term it looks like I’ll have to migrate to something else then.

Hi Kuschku - I think this is misunderstanding, we are offering GitLab CI/CD for free for GitHub.com projects. It'll be free for private repos for a year, and it will be free for public repos forever. See the "Open source projects" and "Anyone using GitHub.com" sections: https://about.gitlab.com/features/github/

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#42

Post by amenod »

Thaxll wrote: post #18

I'm curious for the people that use GitLab CI/CD, what's the pro / cons vs Jenkins and the like?

We used both at previous and current job. As far as I'm concerned there's no reason to stick to Jenkins unless you really can't afford time to migrate. And even then you probably should. Main differences:

- GL is waaaay easier to setup and maintain, both initially (installation, configuration and upgrades) and especially when configuring runners and per-project tasks

- GL saves information about tasks in a file which is part of repo. This might seem counter-intuitive at first, but it makes sense when you realise that build process depends on version (if you want to be able to build old versions of your products). Also, this way config is part of source repo so backup is easier.

- Jenkins can do anything - with a proper plugin. Hunting for the right plugins however is a neverending story. God forbid you ever have to reinstall Jenkins...

Of course that's just my experience. Until GitLab came along we have used Jenkins for a few years and... well, it worked. But it's UX is not comparable to GitLab's.

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#43

Post by victorwu »

chinhodado wrote: post #24

I hate it that Gitlab is focusing too much on all these project-management features, while neglecting the basic code review features such as commenting on a block of code, or making a review session instead of creating individual comments, or the ability to blame previous revisions of a file

Here's an example of a blame on a previous commit of a file.

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blame/57ce7c655cc58e...

Did you have some particular feature request beyond this view?

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#44

Post by dbrgn »

IshKebab wrote: post #19

This is great, although I'll probably stick with Travis & Appveyor for my open source project since Gitlab.com currently only has Linux runners. All three currently have two big flaws IMO though: 1. They all use YAML which is an awful, unintuitive format. 2. The only way to test a configuration is to commit it and push it. Why is there no way to paste a config file in their website and run that? Hopefully one day we'…

On CircleCI you can SSH into a running instance. This helps to test/debug configuration changes without coommitting/pushing. My preferred CI experience so far. (I'm not affiliated.)

Main downside: Only paid Mac support, no Windows support.

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#45

Post by y4mi »

IshKebab wrote: post #19

This is great, although I'll probably stick with Travis & Appveyor for my open source project since Gitlab.com currently only has Linux runners. All three currently have two big flaws IMO though: 1. They all use YAML which is an awful, unintuitive format. 2. The only way to test a configuration is to commit it and push it. Why is there no way to paste a config file in their website and run that? Hopefully one day we'…

Ive got mixed feelings about yaml as well, but which format would you prefer? The Jenkins DSL ist terrible to debug and XML is way too verbose for such a usecase.

Yaml is honestly the best option here.

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#46

Post by williamchia »

eslaught wrote: post #33
eslaught wrote: post #16

Gitlab's CI/CD is amazing. Of all the systems I've seen, it's the easiest to (a) deploy your own runners easily, and (b) mix private and public runners (i.e. the equivalent of using a free plan on Travis, with the benefit that for heavy-duty jobs you can run your own machines). That and first-class support for docker (no more being at the whims of what Travis chooses to deploy in their images), make it a really great…

Edit2: This is wrong, see replies below. An update, having now tried this on a toy Gitlab/Github instance. It looks like this still relies on Gitlab's support for mirroring an external repo, which relies on polling. This is less than awesome, because it means we're back into the (many) minutes latency range from pushing changes to seeing them appear in the mirrored repo (and therefore CI). When I did this before, we…

Hi Eslaught - So the new CI/CD for GitHub feature should be solving the pain points of the old manual mirroring process. When you set up a project and Oauth to GitHub it should automatically implement 3 components: - Bidirectional Mirroring https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/3745 - push webhook to GitLab to trigger CI/CD immediately once a code is committed (e.g. "push mirroring") https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/4691 - GitHub project service integration (to webhook CI status back to GitHub.) https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/3836

Is this not working for you? (may be a bug)

Did you set up the toy instance by creating a CI/CD project and use the GitHub Oauth?

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#47

Post by victorwu »

andrewstuart2 wrote: post #28
chinhodado wrote: post #24

I hate it that Gitlab is focusing too much on all these project-management features, while neglecting the basic code review features such as commenting on a block of code, or making a review session instead of creating individual comments, or the ability to blame previous revisions of a file

It's open source. I'm sure they wouldn't turn down a PR if you submitted one. I've poked around the codebase a few times; it's not too hard to contribute, despite my lack of experience with ruby.

Product manager at GitLab here. We welcome contributions!

See https://about.gitlab.com/contributing/ and https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/CONTRIBU...

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#48

Post by stock_toaster »

eslaught wrote: post #27
jgh wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried CircleCI? I've found it really straightforward to use in a lot of the same ways you mention, except for perhaps the docker support -- it uses docker images and you can of course have a docker image that supports docker, but it doesnt upload to dockerhub out of the box. I'm curious to know how the two compare because I haven't tried Gitlab before.

So last time I checked (and I sent an email to sales to confirm) CircleCI doesn't have support for a configuration where you want to use both public and private runners. I want to use my own machines to build certain jobs (perhaps because those jobs require heavy computation), but I want to use the free, shared, cloud-based runners for the rest (to increase overall throughput). And I want to do this while keeping the…

We use buildkite at work, and it works well. Buildkite hosts the CI master, and you run the workers on your own infrastructure -- as many as you want. So you don't get the free public agents like you want, but you do get private runners.

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#49

Post by Snappy »

williamchia wrote: post #46
eslaught wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Edit2: This is wrong, see replies below. An update, having now tried this on a toy Gitlab/Github instance. It looks like this still relies on Gitlab's support for mirroring an external repo, which relies on polling. This is less than awesome, because it means we're back into the (many) minutes latency range from pushing changes to seeing them appear in the mirrored repo (and therefore CI). When I did this before, we…

Hi Eslaught - So the new CI/CD for GitHub feature should be solving the pain points of the old manual mirroring process. When you set up a project and Oauth to GitHub it should automatically implement 3 components: - Bidirectional Mirroring https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/3745 - push webhook to GitLab to trigger CI/CD immediately once a code is committed (e.g. "push mirroring") https://gitlab.com/gitla…

FWIW, if you created the connection between GitLab and GitHub for your project before 10.6, you'll have to remove the connection and then re-add it to get the push-based mirroring to happen. Otherwise, yes, it will still poll.

Re: GitLab 10.6 released with CI/CD for GitHub

#50

Post by reddit_sucks »

eslaught wrote: post #16

Gitlab's CI/CD is amazing. Of all the systems I've seen, it's the easiest to (a) deploy your own runners easily, and (b) mix private and public runners (i.e. the equivalent of using a free plan on Travis, with the benefit that for heavy-duty jobs you can run your own machines). That and first-class support for docker (no more being at the whims of what Travis chooses to deploy in their images), make it a really great…

It also seems massively overpriced. $99/user/month? Pff. No one is going to pay that. Certainly not large enterprise businesses.
Post reply on HN