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

131–140 of 220 posts

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

#131

Post by argella »

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…

Why don’t you just run gitlab community edition or gitea

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

#132

Post by HWR_14 »

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…

Or (3) Gitlab users that want to self-host. But while those might be users, they are not great customers.

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

#133

Post by megous »

mardifoufs wrote: post #127
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…

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 usu…

My bad experience was mostly just with installing gitlab on a 1GiB RAM VM, to see how it will fare and how easy it is to manage. I expect it to work for people who don't mind throwing a 16GiB+ RAM machine at it. But our dataset is currently like ~200 MiB and simple relatively dumb git hosting just works much better in our case.

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

#134

Post by hardwaresofton »

stabbles wrote: post #83
chainwax wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

- Github Action's design is much better, just look at [1] for example, there's a lot of low-hanging fruit in Gitlab that's not done for some reason - I've had tons of issues with their kubernetes runners, hard to debug spurious system failures - They still don't display the last N bytes of the logs when logs get long, just the first N bytes, which is entirely useless when a build fails - It's awfully slow to navigate…

> Github has many more reusable actions from the community, I don't think Gitlab has that at all? At least not in a convenient way.

This is the big one.

Github’s ability and dominance in the social space means they have the most active actions ecosystems.

They made actions easier to import share and built marketplaces and now gobs of developers build value into it just for clout (and because they enjoy software of course).

If you think about it carefully, it’s actually a security nightmare. You have no idea what a random Github action you “uses:”d is doing, but in practice 90%+ of the time it doesn’t matter, you get good functionality and save time for free.

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

#135

Post by koolba »

megous wrote: post #130
meghan_rain wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 runn…

Why were you paying for it then?

GitLab has a CE version that’s free for commercial use. It sounds like you just want a pretty interface for git repos with some merge flow.

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

#136

Post by jayd16 »

zeusk wrote: post #109
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.

Their solution is not a monthly recurring event.

Yeah, now its 24/7 ops headache.

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

#137

Post by megous »

kiratp wrote: post #105
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…

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.

Hehe, even at US prices we'd break even after half a year.

Average salary where I live is $21k/yr with average devs taking maybe $25-40k/yr. Top jobs being ~$65k

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

#138

Post by megous »

kiratp wrote: post #118
zeusk wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their solution is not a monthly recurring event.

Their solution will require a developer to ssh into VMs to update, debug, upscale etc.

That's about ~1-2 hours a year and already has to be done, because that VM has been used to run other dev services. Also with simple solutions, the benefit is that there's usually nothing to debug. It just works.

And the cost of that has to be compared to cost of gitlab subscription and other gitlab related headaches.

Post reply on HN