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

Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

theregister.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 205 posts

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#161

Post by dnsmichi »

proxysna wrote: post #10

Last year I was second guessing myself if migration to Gitlab EE from Jira, Bitbucket and Jenkins would be worth it, as it was a massive shift for my org. Maybe purchasing a DC version of Atlassian products would be a better alternative, but after short look into invoices and licensing it was decided to go forward with Gitlab. Still not a big fan of how stiff Yaml pipelines feel in Gitlab CI and that tickets for what…

GitLab team member here, thanks for sharing.

> Still not a big fan of how stiff Yaml pipelines feel in Gitlab CI

Maybe the pipeline editor in "Build > Pipeline editor" can help with live linting, or more advanced features such as parent-child pipelines or merge trains.

If you need tips for optimizing the CI/CD pipeline, suggest following these tips in the docs https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/pipelines/pipeline_efficiency.... or a few more tips in my recent talk "Efficient DevSecOps pipelines in cloud-native world", slides from Chemnitz Linux Days 2023 in https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1_kyGo_cWi5dKyxi3BfYj...

> and that tickets for what seems like a simple feature [1] hang around for years, but it is nice.

Thanks for sharing. (FYI for everyone) The linked issue suggests a Docker cache cleanup script, which might be helpful. https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-runner/-/issues/27332#n... -> https://docs.gitlab.com/runner/executors/docker.html#clear-t...

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#162

Post by orf »

Roark66 wrote: post #116

We(as in everyone) are in a serious need of a new git server product. Just do git serving, and do it well. Preferably in a way multiple nodes can be run active-active for scaling and reliability. No need for cicd (Jenkins is fine for that, thank you very much). What are minimum viable features for me? Granular (per branch) security access. Integration with AD federation and other auth providers(congnito, aws iam) and…

In what universe has Jenkins ever been described as “fine”?

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#163

Post by dnsmichi »

neilv wrote: post #18
proxysna wrote: post #10

Last year I was second guessing myself if migration to Gitlab EE from Jira, Bitbucket and Jenkins would be worth it, as it was a massive shift for my org. Maybe purchasing a DC version of Atlassian products would be a better alternative, but after short look into invoices and licensing it was decided to go forward with Gitlab. Still not a big fan of how stiff Yaml pipelines feel in Gitlab CI and that tickets for what…

At a couple startups, I've promoted a mantra of "everything goes into GitLab". If some information is not in GitLab Git and CI, it should be in GitLab Issues or (ugly) GitLab Wiki. Those 4 words avoid a lot of problems. Including avoiding a proliferation of silo'd and leaked and lost information in numerous different SaaSes, apps/programs, and storage services that people will tend to do by default.

GitLab team member here. Thanks for sharing.

> If some information is not in GitLab Git and CI, it should be in GitLab Issues or (ugly) GitLab Wiki.

Tip if you have not used it yet: The rich text editor can help with visual editing issues and the wiki: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/rich_text_editor.html

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#164

Post by weinzierl »

firesteelrain wrote: post #109
InitialLastName wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the worst kind of correct. On-prem will keep existing IFF you have the capacity to pay for 500+ licenses. If you're a small to medium organization that still doesn't trust Atlassian to run your business-critical services (and there are a number of reasons why one might not want to: [0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] ) you're SOL. [0] https://newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/scoop-atlassian [1] https://www.zdnet.com/ar…

It is pricey - I will not disagree with you. It is 1-500 is the license tier and that costs $42,000 per year for the Jira data center subscription, $27,000 for Confluence, BitBucket is $2,300 for 1-25, Crowd is $5800 for 1-500, and Bamboo is $11k for up to 25 users. I would not connect any of these services directly to the Internet.

Do you know how this compares with the Atlassian Server (on-prem) option, let's say in the best case of 500 users?

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#165

Post by wdfx »

mushakov wrote: post #135
wdfx wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this though, is that commonly a requirement (ticket) does not map exactly to a single code repository. I feel that it is breaking encapsulation in a sense to be dealing with issues at the repo level. The repo and the code are implementation details of the business requirements. The tickets describing requirements belong at the next level up of abstraction?

Hi there! I lead the product teams for planning features at GitLab. Issues at the group level are in the works to meet this exact need. You can follow the work in this issue https://gitlab.com/groups/gitlab-org/-/epics/8308 . As always, would love to hear from you in the issue if you have feedback about the approach or have follow up questions.

Thanks for providing this info.

I do use gitlab-ce at home for my personal projects and think it's awesome.

I would recommend it to work in terms of its features for code management and build pipelines.

But I just cannot see any of our product management team wanting to use this for Roadmap/Epic/Task tracking at all. Its far too technical and too close to the code, both of which are things they have neither the time, interest or skill to interact with. Management are comfortable with Jira (and some of the extended Atlassian suite), as it hides the technical stuff away and allows them to focus on the management data.

I don't know what the perfect solution looks like though, and I also haven't spend the time to exhaustively try all the competing products either.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#166

Post by mardifoufs »

sarki_247 wrote: post #136
mardifoufs wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus, the cost of gitlab is getting insane. It's very hard to justify the jump, no matter how worth it is. Jira "just works" for now, and honestly it wouldn't surprise me if gitlab raises their pricing even further. (which I totally understand, they are not profitable yet and have to do a lot of work. It's just that it sucks having to be cautious about who gets access to your instance since you can't have multiple ti…

GitLab team member here. With GitLab Ultimate, users with the guest role do not consume a seat. To learn more, see https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/subscriptions/self_managed/index....

But there's no way to have an actual "developer" role that isn't using non-ultimate seat right?

I get why in some sense, because once you use ultimate you switch to using a EE install instead of the CE. But I think even having the choice between ultimate and normal paid tiers would be great, even if it means no free users on the instance.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#167

Post by mardifoufs »

Aeolun wrote: post #125
mardifoufs wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus, the cost of gitlab is getting insane. It's very hard to justify the jump, no matter how worth it is. Jira "just works" for now, and honestly it wouldn't surprise me if gitlab raises their pricing even further. (which I totally understand, they are not profitable yet and have to do a lot of work. It's just that it sucks having to be cautious about who gets access to your instance since you can't have multiple ti…

Gitlab is so absurdly expensive that I’ve basically given up on ever using them. The stupid thing is I don’t need 90% of their ultimate features, but I do want the remaining 10%.

Yes this is the weird part. I have a very hard time thinking of an organization that would need ultimate features for even 30% of its staff. It's usually super niche features, or features that don't necessarily make sense on an individual seat level but that you have to pay for for every user. It makes the value proposition very hard to see, because sure generating security reporting and auditing are nice but why would we want to have that for every user? The only way to actually manage cost would be to have separate instances for teams which is a nightmare for selfhosting. Especially with the weekly update schedule lol

To me, a flat instance tier pricing + per seat cost would make so much more sense.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#168

Post by dnsmichi »

nvm0n2 wrote: post #111
HankB99 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not speaking for the GP. I use MkDocs and keep my personal notes. The only weak spot for me is that I haven't fully grokked search and as my notes grow, it can be harder to find things. I alternate between figuring out how search and how to bolt on some other search utility. MkDocs includes a utility to publish to Github pages but I keep my notes on a self hosted Gitea server and serve using "python -m http".

Take a look at mkdocs-material, it's not just a theme, it adds some local-side search as well. Still with fully static pages.

The search works great. I'm using MkDocs with Material as my personal handbook because of the simplicity -- for example, I usually remember great articles in conversations but always forget their location. Since I started writing my newsletter https://opsindev.news/ including an MkDocs web archive, I can share interesting URLs way faster :) Or let folks discover it by themselves, using the search.

Configuration in https://gitlab.com/dnsmichi/opsindev.news/-/blob/main/mkdocs...

Material for MkDocs also has an insiders build, accessible through sponsorship. https://squidfunk.github.io/mkdocs-material/insiders/ These features add more value to MkDocs -- I initially joined to get GDPR-compliant cookie banners and stayed to support a great project.

Re: Atlassian prepares to abandon on-prem server products

#170

Post by WorldMaker »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #38
kwanbix wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While Jira does many many things right, it is also horrible in so many ways. What options are you evaluating?

Despite the "Azure" name, Azure DevOps Server (formerly Team Foundation Server), is still a rock-solid on-prem system for git repo hosting, issues/stories/projects, build automation, and the rest - though I feel it has stagnated somewhat, and git integration still feels half-baked compared to TFS's previous SVN-clone, but is still my first-choice for on-prem installs (granted, I'm still wedded to the MSFT stack).

If you have access to Azure DevOps Server your company likely also has access in its existing plans to GitHub Enterprise (on-prem) as well. GitHub Enterprise is usually about 6 to 9 months behind GitHub "Regular", but that's quite a bit better than Azure DevOps "Regular" which now seems destined to be 2-3 years behind GitHub and however far Azure DevOps Server trails behind that.

Microsoft is still playing "will they/won't they" with killing Azure DevOps for whatever reasons make sense mostly only to themselves, but it is hard not to wonder if the writing is on the wall to migrate to something like GitHub Enterprise sooner rather than later.

(Arguably yes, running GHE is different than Azure DevOps Server, as it is still mostly not Microsoft-stack. But I'm told they package it in a friendly enough way that even companies deep in Microsoft-stack-only don't have too many problems.)

Post reply on HN