191–200 of 300 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The $100/user/month model It's not a high number of accounts before you can have a person dedicated 50% of the time to just running a local gitlab setup with any options you want. Including infra costs + on-demand CI/CD.
How would that help? You still have to pay the license fee...
We have a small development team (20) but 100+ clients that have reporter role. We are in the process of moving out some clients so we could use Starter. Premium was too expensive because reporters count as a user and guests are only free in Ultimate. So now we are looking for alternatives, which sucks because as a developer I really liked Gitlab. Does anyone have any recommendations?
Never forget that there's a 4th tier plan: host it yourself. With containers it is really easy to setup a GitLab instance. It isn't difficult to integrate GitLab with other tools. We are a Gov company and it is really easier to put man power to customize it than to climb all the bureaucratic hurdles to buy it.
Which features do you get with self hosted?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How would that help? You still have to pay the license fee...
Is the price for self-hosted usage the same as SaaS? I could not find a clear answer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I also have a small dev team of 25 that wants to move to gitlab paid model but the upfront cost is too much. We need a monthly payment plan even if it costs more than annual one because I can't justify a high upfront cost to my ceo. We're rapidly expanding and expect to be 100 within 2021.
Thanks. I will share this, too. Edit - we share why we prioritize annual pricing over monthly in our handbook: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/ceo/pricing/#annual-pricin...
We're using Azure DevOps at the bank I'm currently working at. I've been a long-time user of it actually, and am a big fan - I just don't see how GitLab's new pricing can compete with AzDo, or even GitHub. $49/user/m for Premium seems really expensive compared to AzDo and GitHub. Does GitLab have some killer feature I'm not aware of that justifies spending 2-10x that of the competition? $99/m for Ultimate eds? It doe…
There's a single bullet in that table that makes it all make sense:
> Free Guest users
Guest users can: * Create issues * Leave comments * Clone or download the project source
That sounds like it covers the use case for a substantial portion of people who currently have paid accounts.
So Basic -> Bronze -> Silver pricing pays for the increase in features. Ultimate/Gold/whatever includes price increases for features, as well as not having to pay for accounts for people who don't really use GitLab much at all.
I strongly suspect the Ultimate tier is geared towards large companies who's primary line of business is not technology. They have a lot of people who need minimal access to GitLab, and a small number of people who need to access GitLab a lot. It wouldn't be super surprising to me if the difference in cost between Silver and Gold is minimal for someone like Walmart or P&G because they can stop paying for accounts for PMs, helpdesk workers, the people that actually use the software, etc.
It's probably not really of much interest to a tech company because so many people need access to GitLab that you get very little gain from free Guests.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Invest time in GH actions, they are actually really good once you get over the initial hump.
I love GH Actions so much, though would love dive into GitLab's CI/CD too if anyone has good resources on that.
Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5705U8s_nQ
Docs: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/quick_start/
Slides and a demo exercise: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-de/swiss-meetup-2021-jan
We have about 5 devs, but the bulk of our GitLab users are non-technical (sales, customer support, etc.) who probably do not even know what git is. Those users are lurkers, but their input can be valuable and if possible I'd like them to be able to login onto GitLab.
Getting billed $228/users/year upfront is a harsh blow. I don't think I will ever be able to justify such cost to our CEO.
The way I see it now, we will renew our Bronze plan during the one-year grace period, while we are preparing the transition to another tool. Hopefully, we never really integrated our processes too much with GitLab, so we can transition whenever we need to.
If the "per user" subscription is to be that expensive, then I would suggest GitLab to provide a monthly subscription and/or a "per committer" subscription instead of a "per user" subscription.
We are a small company and have been paying for GitLab's Bronze plan for about two years now. We have about 5 devs, but the bulk of our GitLab users are non-technical (sales, customer support, etc.) who probably do not even know what git is. Those users are lurkers, but their input can be valuable and if possible I'd like them to be able to login onto GitLab. Getting billed $228/users/year upfront is a harsh blow. I…
We recently spent a couple weeks going over pricing with a GitLab regional Account Leader. We already use GitLab for all our source repos, CI/CD pipelines, and had been using it for issue management as well — all fully self-hosted. The hope was to drop Jira, which was also being used for project planning, and fully adopt GitLab, but the costs were simply unjustifiable. Basically GitLab ended up being a full order of…
Yea. Love gitlab but the pricing does add up quickly. Even if with all the features, it's really hard to get value out of Gold/Ultimate. When I add up all the major SaaS apps an average user has: SSO, Email, Chat, Storage, Zoom, Support. Combined, GitLab Ultimate costs 2-3x that. And I promise you that as much as we all hate a messy inbox, email is more broadly useful than GitLab. The other problem with ultimate is t…
I understand that this type of usage would only be suitable for small teams.