21–30 of 98 posts
Has anyone yet built a tool which will deploy an environment to all three major cloud providers and bench mark them against each?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They had started this move months before Microsoft purchased Github. If you read the linked article one of the biggest reasons is that the GCP implementation of kubernetes and better integration with their CDN they'll be getting a significant performance boost. It's taken this long since they've had to make infrastructure changes along with some code changes to get it better supporting the deployment there.
What meaningful CDN integrations are in Google Cloud?
Why is it that Microsoft are ok with serving traffic from countries under embargo but Google are not? As far as I know Amazon don't follow the embargo like this with AWS traffic either.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I also read they would do this to prepare for a Google buy.
That makes little sense for Google. The corporate cultures are very different, GitLab isn't a major money maker and it does nothing for them internally since they use a mono-repo. Cloud platforms can change after acquisitions. If Google wanted them they would have already bought.
Seems silly to move just because MS bought github. Are there other compelling reasons?
As a matter of fact they should in fact avoid any kind of cloud vendor lock-in and spread the deployment across the big 3
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I also read they would do this to prepare for a Google buy.
That makes little sense for Google. The corporate cultures are very different, GitLab isn't a major money maker and it does nothing for them internally since they use a mono-repo. Cloud platforms can change after acquisitions. If Google wanted them they would have already bought.
Generally, companies are not bought for culture. Folks say a lot about their most valuable resource being their people, but typically a purchaser wants to buy assets. In software that will be less about cash or inventory or plants and more about customer contracts, partnerships, brands, trademarks, patents, copyrights, existing sales organisations and so on.
> GitLab isn't a major money maker ... If Google wanted them they would have already bought.
They might buy simply to have a hedge against Github. Gitlab comes with a lot of independent brand awareness that Google has not, so far, been able to gain against Github in this area.
The cloud providers are involved in a no-prisoners effort to lock in customers while the market emerges for the first time. This is golden age of rail stuff, there are massive path dependencies that will be very difficult to unwind.
Each will grow aggressively on every edge of their current surfaces, whether by implementation, partnership or purchase. Or all three, in varying orders, as they think works best. They will rapidly copy each other to try and prevent competitors gaining an unassailable lead in some segment.
Disclosure: I work for Pivotal. We have partnerships with Google and Microsoft.
Why is it that Microsoft are ok with serving traffic from countries under embargo but Google are not? As far as I know Amazon don't follow the embargo like this with AWS traffic either.
Aren't many of the Azure data centers actually contracted out to other independent companies in those respective countries?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, I also read they would do this to prepare for a Google buy.
That makes little sense for Google. The corporate cultures are very different, GitLab isn't a major money maker and it does nothing for them internally since they use a mono-repo. Cloud platforms can change after acquisitions. If Google wanted them they would have already bought.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
not saying it's the reason but their funding comes from Google Ventures http://uk.businessinsider.com/gitlab-raises-20-million-from-...
Yes, I also read they would do this to prepare for a Google buy.