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

GitLab Direction

about.gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 137 posts

Re: GitLab Direction

#91

Post by rqs »

kushalpandya wrote: post #25
rqs wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know about the performance and bugfix issues, but based on my experience with gitlab.com, I don't think it has a good UX design. You see, there are many many best practices in the UX world, just like those in the programming world. And seems to me, GitLab is not following many of them. For example, the width of the content area. I've once read an article that trying to dig into that topic, and one opinion tha…

Hi, Thanks for your feedback around content width. Making GitLab accessible on all screen sizes is important to us given that there are many users out there using HD (720p) screens primarily. Our design indeed has fixed width portrait container enclosing the page body (with maximum size being 1200px) so here's how it looks on a large monitor at 100% zoom: https://i.imgur.com/lTqL6X8.png Hence if the browser viewport…

Sigh

So, hi kushalpandya, jmiserez and svesselov (For some reason I cannot reply your comment)

Looks like you guys didn't understand what I just said: The problem is the UX design is NOT very good. I think you guys should re-think about how user will interact with your interface.

For example (since I discovered the 'fluid' setting): Even if a user have a super wide monitor, when the user turn on the fluid setting and maximized the browser, should they saw an interface like this: https://screenshotscdn.firefoxusercontent.com/images/324e117... ?

Also, from my point of view, 1200px is still too wide for that list. If you take look the version that I've modified, you will notice it's only about 400px wide, and with that width, I can scan every results on the page without moving my eyes too much.

The magic thing is, with 400px, YOU can also scan every results on the page without moving YOUR eyes too much, even your monitor is wider than mine. And THIS, my friend, is the so called compatibility. The goal here, is to provide the same level of user experience -- GOOD user experience, NOT to fill the whole width so the page look like the same in every resolutions.

Again, the key point here is NOT about just the width of the page, it's not a problem between 400px and 1200px and 100%, it's about how you guys think how users will feel about the UI -- Will user feel tired when using it? Can the UI effectively helping user to get what they want? etc.

If you have no idea, go checkout some list designs on https://dribbble.com/ (By the way, dribbble.com itself is very well designed, go learn from it)

Don't worry though, I'll keep using your product and patiently waiting for improvement :)

Re: GitLab Direction

#92

Post by barrystaes »

tyldum wrote: post #73
brandonwamboldt wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. They only have four tiers (four equivalent tiers for hosted and on-premise technically). This is quite reasonable, as they need to provide flexibility for their customers. They are quite clear about which tiers provide which features. 2. This is purely subjective. I quite like the design, both more than GitHub and Bitbucket. They do have a UX team, and they conduct regular user tests. They've also made a lot of im…

When my company subscribed there was only a community and enterprise tier. Now this has become the starter edition and I feel we are losing a lot of value. We are 200 employees, but only 10 developers using the advanced features. We really want to make GitLab our hub (GitOps and all), however the the cost of going beyond starter edition is mind blowing (x5). So if we are to embrace GitLab further we must abandon the…

I recognize this. Not every company with developers is a software develop company. Those 190 others that dont use the advanced features, what subset of functionality do they require?

Re: GitLab Direction

#93

Post by vorpalhex »

whitepoplar wrote: post #2

GitLab is like the average kid in class that everybody makes fun of for constantly asking questions, but the joke's on them because "a little bit of slope makes up for a lot of y-intercept." While GitLab may have warts, I feel that they're very earnestly working to make the product better, bit by bit, day by day, and will one day surpass GitHub.

I moved over a project from GitHub to GitLab recently - I wanted to try a competitor, and I wanted to take advantage of their CI/CD feature.

I've actually been very impressed. The UI is laggy at times, and they haven't mastered the UX/information architecture like Github has, but they have added a lot of other valuable features.

Re: GitLab Direction

#94

Post by sytse »

tyldum wrote: post #73
brandonwamboldt wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. They only have four tiers (four equivalent tiers for hosted and on-premise technically). This is quite reasonable, as they need to provide flexibility for their customers. They are quite clear about which tiers provide which features. 2. This is purely subjective. I quite like the design, both more than GitHub and Bitbucket. They do have a UX team, and they conduct regular user tests. They've also made a lot of im…

When my company subscribed there was only a community and enterprise tier. Now this has become the starter edition and I feel we are losing a lot of value. We are 200 employees, but only 10 developers using the advanced features. We really want to make GitLab our hub (GitOps and all), however the the cost of going beyond starter edition is mind blowing (x5). So if we are to embrace GitLab further we must abandon the…

"I fear GitLab will fence off future functionality with even more tiers at random" our goal when introducing the new tiers was to put new functionality in then, not to move existing functionality away. In the future we might move functionality between tiers to keep the grouping logical but we won't do that lightly let alone randomly.

New functionaly is made iteratively starting with the minimal viable change. But they should always function and additions should land in the same tier. If we missed the mark somewhere please let us know.

Re: GitLab Direction

#95

Post by sytse »

abuldauskas wrote: post #71

One of my major pain points with GitLab was its API. The lack of coherent API design ultimately made me lose hope in the product. For example I think it still lacks an ability to create threads on MRs. Until recently it wasn't possible to approve any MRs either, for 10+ versions of the product and 4+ versions of the api, but adding emoji was... The disjointed API made it nearly impossible to create quality tooling on…

Are the APIs you need added now or are there ones still missing? Anything we can improve in the API organization?

Re: GitLab Direction

#96

Post by bigtunacan »

manigandham wrote: post #83
tyldum wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When my company subscribed there was only a community and enterprise tier. Now this has become the starter edition and I feel we are losing a lot of value. We are 200 employees, but only 10 developers using the advanced features. We really want to make GitLab our hub (GitOps and all), however the the cost of going beyond starter edition is mind blowing (x5). So if we are to embrace GitLab further we must abandon the…

You pay 200 employees but don't want to spend $19/user/month on software for a company hub? That's not really a small company, and this seems like a budgeting problem if money is that tight. You can also try running multiple installations with a separate dev-only instance with more features. Also have you tried contacting Gitlab to negotiate? A few emails can go a long way.

I would say 200 employees is fairly small company; and depending on the line of business it is certainly small enough that profit margins and thus spending may need to be closely watched.

If you consider that the OP has only 10 out of 200 users that need the advanced features, but has to purchase the advanced features for all 200 users for anyone to use those features that is $45,600 a year.

Now if it were possible for example to have a mixed licensing model; buy 10 Premium licenses for the users who need it and 190 Starter licenses for everyone else then that is $11,400 a year. That is a difference of $34,200 a year so it may be the difference between being able to hire another employee or not.

Re: GitLab Direction

#97

Post by sytse »

leipert wrote: post #65
adrinavarro wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why Spain, France, Portugal, Ireland, Sweden… are excluded, but not Germany or the United Kingdom or many other EU countries.

Disclaimer: Working for GitLab since March. Several countries are on hiring stop currently, mainly those that you have listed. This is due to administrative reasons, as people from those countries work as contractors, as we have no entities there. In Europe we currently have an entity in NL, BE, UK and DE. Furthermore we have an Indian, Chinese and of course US entity.

We don't have an entity in India and China put can hire people there as employees via other companies.

Re: GitLab Direction

#98

Post by sytse »

substring wrote: post #84

Gitlabs security is absolutely horrific: https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-1307...

None of these was out in the wild. We take pride in requesting CVE numbers to aid our users in remediation. We think that identifying and promptly fixing vulnerabilities is key to security.

Re: GitLab Direction

#99

Post by sytse »

zaarn wrote: post #31
AFNobody wrote: post #3

GitLab should, frankly, focus on performance/ux/bug-fix releases every other release. And probably for the next 2-3 releases to get some of the warts under control. This constant push for project management features, frankly, is at the expense of the core product. I'd rather use a combination of GitHub and JIRA over Gitlab.

You could look at other products too. Gitea has been very close to core Github Features IMO and Gogs (the original fork) has some neat other features separate from Github. There is also Bitbucket which does integrate neatly into JIRA in my experience. There is a lot of choice, Gitlab is great if you need a "everything in one box" solution for every problem or demand you might encounter during development. Other Git-W…

At GitLab we invested a lot of time on our JIRA integration and we released support for GitLab subgroups in JIRA Development panel yesterday.

Re: GitLab Direction

#100

Post by nathan_f77 »

DouweM wrote: post #88
nathan_f77 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi there, glad to hear that you enjoy working at GitLab! My impression was just based on some things I've been hearing about compensation, and a couple of negative comments and articles. I think the best way to explain it is that GitLab sounds like a more traditional place to work. Similar to companies in the UK, Europe, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. It's very unlikely that I would accept a job in one of these…

I also feel like you're painting companies outside Silicon Valley with a pretty broad brush. There's nothing about a healthy engineering culture that makes it unique to Silicon Valley, and there are many, many companies in those regions you mention that would take significant issue with that generalization. If you want to optimize for annual salary, Silicon Valley is probably the place to be, but if you want to optim…

Sorry yes, companies can have a healthy engineering culture anywhere in the world, even if they pay the local market rate.

It’s just my personal experience interviewing at a number of startups/companies in these countries, and from friends who work at them. I would really love to move to Toronto, but the salaries are just way too low. Hopefully I can find another way to move there.

Post reply on HN