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

Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 112 posts

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#71

Post by sofixa »

zymhan wrote: post #16
marcinzm wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people most annoyed in the last thread were the ones who evangelized GitLab within their companies but hadn't yet convinced the company to pull the plug or transition to a paid plan. They now have egg on their faces as GitLab is no longer a viable option due to pricing.

I worked at a company that only used Gitlab's free tier for production deployments. But instead of actually paying for their service to resolve various limitations we ran into, my manager decided he "had a bad experience with Gitlab" and so we switched providers. I honestly don't know what people are thinking using a free tier for some service provider to run their company.

> I honestly don't know what people are thinking using a free tier for some service provider to run their company

Idk, at work we have a pretty big free hosted Gitlab ( across multiple machines and DCs) and there are very little limitations ( which are not worth the price jump from free to pretty expensive)

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#72

Post by FreeFull »

bearjaws wrote: post #69
whalesalad wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$240/yr/employee for an LDAP connector is absolutely INSANE.

You get way more than LDAP connectivity...

Doesn't matter that you get more if you don't make use of it anyway.

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#73

Post by easton »

rijoja wrote: post #26

Okay, so I want to give gitlab the benefit of the doubt here. So look: "GitLab is second only to Microsoft-owned GitHub in this market. GitHub is tough to compete with in part because of Microsoft's financial clout and the fact that GitHub is more a strategic asset to win developers than a profit centre." Aren't ms kinda dumping the price here. As in selling at loss in order to kill competition. Wouldn't this be ille…

GitHub Enterprise hasn't raised its price since the Microsoft acquisition, it's still $21 per user per month. You get CI minutes now if you keep your repos public, but most enterprises don't. I don't think they are selling at a loss.

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#74

Post by gpm »

throw2838 wrote: post #60
gpm wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At 1000 engineers, that's a fulltime engineer to support the "ldap+gitlab community fork"... Realistically that takes a lot less than a fulltime engineer to support. Of course this assumes no other value is acquired from the license, but if we take the comment at face value it seems worthwhile to just add it yourself.

Sounds like good side business idea. Good engineer could create it over weekend, than sell licenses and do support.

Seems somewhat unethical IMO (admittedly I'm not sure I can fully justify this feeling), and most good software engineers are paid enough to be able to be fairly ethical, but yes.

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#75

Post by magicalhippo »

bearjaws wrote: post #29
Grollicus wrote: post #22

We're currently using the starter edition for exactly one reason, ldap integration. Now we're supposed to pay $240 / employee for an ldap integration?! Not sure what we'll do but I suspect scripting some ldap integration into our gitlab will be one of the best spent times in terms of ROI for me this year.

$240 a year (per engineer) to keep your engineers focusing on providing product value is beyond paying for itself. Building custom in house tooling always costs 5x more than engineers believe, and ultimately doesn't improve your end product. This kind of tooling would probably require at least 100 engineers to justify the innate cost of building and maintaining it.

> $240 a year (per engineer)

That's a big part of the issue. It's not per engineer, as they don't allow mixing subscription levels.

So it's per everyone that needs some access.

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#76

Post by anderspitman »

RantyDave wrote: post #49
rsync wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I am rooting for sr.ht which looks like github would have looked if I had built it .

I just had a quick poke around. Fast, innit? Very 'plaintext chic'. Love it.

And 0 JavaScript.

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#77

Post by vbrandl »

Grollicus wrote: post #22

We're currently using the starter edition for exactly one reason, ldap integration. Now we're supposed to pay $240 / employee for an ldap integration?! Not sure what we'll do but I suspect scripting some ldap integration into our gitlab will be one of the best spent times in terms of ROI for me this year.

Not sure if there is any special LDAP functionality, I don't know of, but we use Gitlab CE with LDAP at work. Also looking at the feature comparison [0], I can't find any LDAP related features in the paid versions, that aren't available in the free version. Maybe the feature you are using has been moved to Gitlab CE. Then you can move to the free version.

[0]: https://about.gitlab.com/pricing/gitlab-com/feature-comparis...

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#78

Post by jeanjogr »

bearjaws wrote: post #69
whalesalad wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$240/yr/employee for an LDAP connector is absolutely INSANE.

You get way more than LDAP connectivity...

If you only need that, all the extra stuff is useless.

Re: Gitlab removes its 'starter' tier Users must either pay 5x more or lose features

#80

Post by [deleted] »

rijoja wrote: post #26

Okay, so I want to give gitlab the benefit of the doubt here. So look: "GitLab is second only to Microsoft-owned GitHub in this market. GitHub is tough to compete with in part because of Microsoft's financial clout and the fact that GitHub is more a strategic asset to win developers than a profit centre." Aren't ms kinda dumping the price here. As in selling at loss in order to kill competition. Wouldn't this be ille…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN