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

Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 220 posts

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#121

Post by jdminhbg »

skeeter2020 wrote: post #112
kiratp wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A developer costs about 250K a year all up. That doesn’t include opportunity cost. 49, 40 hour weeks a year = $127.55 an hour. 29* 7 * 12 / (127.55) = 19.09 hours If it takes you more than 2.3 dev days (100% productive) you’re negative ROI doing it yourself. This math doesn’t even factor in the opportunity cost of doing this.

>> A developer costs about 250K a year all up. Gotta love HN math. Calculations to two decimal places, starting with a number plucked from the high end of a distribution with standard deviation of at least 100K.

> the high end of a distribution

What a dev costs is not the same as what an advertised salary for a dev is. This is closer to the middle of the distribution for dev costs in the US.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#122

Post by trowawee »

mettamage wrote: post #113
kiratp wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A developer costs about 250K a year all up. That doesn’t include opportunity cost. 49, 40 hour weeks a year = $127.55 an hour. 29* 7 * 12 / (127.55) = 19.09 hours If it takes you more than 2.3 dev days (100% productive) you’re negative ROI doing it yourself. This math doesn’t even factor in the opportunity cost of doing this.

> A developer costs about 250K a year all up. I currently cost more like 80K in euro's if I reason from my employer's side. So tell me, how are you getting to the 250K exactly? Europe exists as well and even in the US there are enough companies that don't pay FAANG salaries.

Even if you throw out SF salaries as a wild outlier, this isn't actually that ridiculous. An average quality mid-career dev (5-10 years exp.) in a second tier market like Chicago/Denver/Austin/Boston can pretty easily make 170-200 in cash. "[A]ll up" is the key here tho; there's a big non-salary component in the US that doesn't exist in Europe. Tack on health insurance and the total cost to the company will easily blow past 250 right there. Plus, you're probably giving them some equity and a yearly bonus.

I'll be honest, it does sometimes blow my mind to see how low salaries are over there when I look at job postings and Who's Hiring and the like. I'm jealous of a lot of things Europeans take for granted, but it's wild to me to see senior positions in major European capitals paying the amount that I made two years out of a bootcamp.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#123

Post by mrslave »

jacooper wrote: post #94

Personally I only care about GitLab because its open source with a good CI and because of Copilot. If the supreme court says the copilot is fully legal, I would probably just revert to using Github for personal projects(their free tier is just unbeatable), i still use it more than anything else, because everything is on Github. I am excited about Gitea Actions[1], as I feel gitea is generally only missing a decent CI…

What's your preferred CI/CD system to pair with Gitea? I tried Drone once and found the configuration to be nasty, specifically OAuth2 under Docker Compose. Also the Drone UI left a lot to be desired. This was a while ago so grain of salt etc.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#124

Post by jdminhbg »

mettamage wrote: post #113
kiratp wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A developer costs about 250K a year all up. That doesn’t include opportunity cost. 49, 40 hour weeks a year = $127.55 an hour. 29* 7 * 12 / (127.55) = 19.09 hours If it takes you more than 2.3 dev days (100% productive) you’re negative ROI doing it yourself. This math doesn’t even factor in the opportunity cost of doing this.

> A developer costs about 250K a year all up. I currently cost more like 80K in euro's if I reason from my employer's side. So tell me, how are you getting to the 250K exactly? Europe exists as well and even in the US there are enough companies that don't pay FAANG salaries.

US salaries don’t include employer payroll taxes, unemployment insurance, health insurance, retirement matching, etc. Total cost can easily be 2x advertised salary.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#125

Post by prepend »

chainwax wrote: post #78
gregwebs wrote: post #70

Gitlab pricing used to be something like $4/mo and they saw incredible growth. They raised their rates to $19/mo and now are seeing slow growth. In April they are raising to $29/mo- not sure what they think is going to happen. Also, for anyone that actively watches, they have to wonder if there will be another price hike once you are on their platform. Github Enterprise is only $21/mo and for most users it has all th…

Unless Actions has gotten a lot more fleshed out since I last used it, I don't think it's as robust as Gitlab CI.

I disagree. Actions is really nice and I don’t have to set up and debug runners. In GitHub, I can have dedicated runners if I want, but99% of the time, I just use vanilla Ubuntu runners.

My fear though is that GitHub will Jack up their prices once I’m running everything. Right now they give 50k minutes per month, but that could change at any point. GitHub enterprise started out at $8/month and now it’s $20+.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#126

Post by memco »

gregwebs wrote: post #70

Gitlab pricing used to be something like $4/mo and they saw incredible growth. They raised their rates to $19/mo and now are seeing slow growth. In April they are raising to $29/mo- not sure what they think is going to happen. Also, for anyone that actively watches, they have to wonder if there will be another price hike once you are on their platform. Github Enterprise is only $21/mo and for most users it has all th…

> Github Enterprise is only $21/mo and for most users it has all the same features of Gitlab.

Of those things that I like more in Gitlab, it is deploy tokens: an easy way to be able to dole out permission to clone code where needed without having to bother with key management or user management. As far as I can tell GitHub has something like this but it requires setting up an app to talk to the API and isn’t nearly simple as the button available in Gitlab.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#127

Post by mardifoufs »

megous wrote: post #95
gregwebs wrote: post #70

Gitlab pricing used to be something like $4/mo and they saw incredible growth. They raised their rates to $19/mo and now are seeing slow growth. In April they are raising to $29/mo- not sure what they think is going to happen. Also, for anyone that actively watches, they have to wonder if there will be another price hike once you are on their platform. Github Enterprise is only $21/mo and for most users it has all th…

At $29 * 7 * 12 per year it became way cheaper for us to just piece together functionality we needed from nginx+cgit+homegrown database to store users/repos/acl/push info and a few git hooks written in a few lines of PHP. The cost is now independent of the number of developers using the system. So far it did cost ~1 month of paying for github in dev time and I can't imagine it costing much more when we'll want to add…

I mean I dislike the gitlab pricing increases, and we are kind of regretting sticking with them (especially since everyone on the Gitlab instance has to pay for a seat, even when not using any of the premium features) considering how Github is cheaper and has a higher release velocity at this point... But to be very fair, we never saw what you describe about memory leaks or slow ruby services. Migrations are also usually silent and done in the background. I guess the software itself is pretty heavy, but predictably so (RAM usage rarely spikes, for example).

We have a 400+ seats instance, with a decade worth of code and it just works 99.99% of the time, and upgrades are generally painless. Though our instance is pretty vanilla, and internal to our corporation. The runners are more finnicky and buggier, especially since we have tons of different build targets but that's besides the point if we are just talking about using it as a dumb git repo. And if you only need it for that purpose why even pay instead of using the community edition?

(I'm in the AI team but I sometimes help the devops team that takes care of the instance to customize our AI pipelines, so I'm familiar with gitlab and with my colleagues experience with it)

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#128

Post by cornel_io »

rossmohax wrote: post #50
aynyc wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was GitLab ahead of GitHub? I've been using both for as long as I remember, I always thought GitLab is more marketing than GitHub. Believe or not, I prefer BitBucket because I don't care much for CI integrations.

Gitlab CI pipelines are miles ahead from Github Actions or Circle CI.

That was true several years ago, yes, back when GitHub Actions was super new and pretty crappy...

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#129

Post by grogenaut »

kiratp wrote: post #120
skeeter2020 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> A developer costs about 250K a year all up. Gotta love HN math. Calculations to two decimal places, starting with a number plucked from the high end of a distribution with standard deviation of at least 100K.

Ok, so at 80K a year, that’s a 3x multiplier. So annually you have to spend Can’t be done outside of “we hired the OG devs of Gitlab/hub/etc”

don't forget benefits, hardware, support staff portion, and possibly office. We typically calculate 50% over... so that's 120k at a likely low end.

we run ghe at work and I know we spend 8 hours 4+ times a year for a test upgrade and then an upgrade from an eng that makes above either of your estimates in salary alone.

None of this includes all the work we're not doing to build new integrations or features in the ci system that we get for pay for the product. But we're not a scrappy startup either. We're paying down much of the tech debt from being a scrappy startup, it's not been cheap.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#130

Post by megous »

meghan_rain wrote: post #115
megous wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At $29 * 7 * 12 per year it became way cheaper for us to just piece together functionality we needed from nginx+cgit+homegrown database to store users/repos/acl/push info and a few git hooks written in a few lines of PHP. The cost is now independent of the number of developers using the system. So far it did cost ~1 month of paying for github in dev time and I can't imagine it costing much more when we'll want to add…

The classic HN Dropbox comment, never gets old.

Yes, but all we used gitlab for was git repo hosting with push access control for about 40 repositories to allow sharing code via push/pull and not much else (almost no issues/pull requests). It's ridiculous to pay $2500/yr so that 7 people can do push/pull over slow growing set of ~200MiB of data when it can be handled in much more performant way by a 36$/yr (+ a small one time setup cost) VM we already had for running other things.
Post reply on HN