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

Gitlab S-1

sec.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 295 posts

Re: Gitlab S-1

#161

Post by pid-1 »

easton wrote: post #48

So GitLab is advertising that it's the one place to do the entire software development lifecycle. Are there any big shops that have converted to 100% (or almost 100%) GitLab? Out of the six big names they list on their website, the only one that they have a case study for is Thomson Reuters, and they used Jenkins for CI (and it's from 2017, so a lot of this other functionality wasn't built yet). It's just a somewhat…

My company uses GitLab for repo, CI/CD, image management, package management, issue management and K8s with the $20 plan.

Having all those things in the same place does wonders for my sanity.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#163

Post by ModernMech »

oweiler wrote: post #159
ModernMech wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, Gitlab has been leading the way for a while now, consistently introducing new features that Github eventually copies. It's a real testament to the power of competition. I first started using Gitlab due to free private repositories, which Github eventually added. Gitlab had free built-in CI/CD first, and Github eventually followed. I'm still on Gitlab these days despite Github catching up, and still enjoying feat…

Except Github Actions is leaps and bounds above Gitlab CI.

It really is, they one-upped Gitlab, and you can tell there is a clear difference in resources between the two companies. Yay competition! I especially like how you can run parallel builds on Windows, Mac, and Linux with one line of code with GitHub actions.

What’s nice about Git as a distributed VCS is I can use both GitHub and Gitlab and get the best of both worlds very easily. I win either way, and neither can lock me in (you know Microsoft would do it if they could, but they can’t). Therefore we see actual legitimate competition, where one has to constantly improve to outdo the other. I wish more things worked that way.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#164

Post by trhway »

nzealand wrote: post #151
Wronnay wrote: post #99

Last valuation was $6 billion, they initially wanted to go public in November of 2020 but because of COVID they delayed it. Doesn't sound cheap to me for a company who isn't profitable yet... (Microsoft payed 7,5 billion for GitHub and I think we can all agree that GitLab isn't used as much so nearly the same valuations seems a bit high too me)

Tech valuations have doubled over the last four years. The simplest heuristic is price/sales ratios. Money losing companies that are doubling their revenue are currently going for nosebleed ps ratios of 40-100, which equates to $5-$13b market cap.

this is why the companies in the last year before IPO go like crazy all the way in burning cash on customer acquisition and sales expansion. All the issues stemming from that are left to be dealt with by the post-IPO bug holders.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#165

Post by amelius »

NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #142
amelius wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds a lot like: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predatory_pricing And is illegal in some jurisdictions and frowned upon in others.

No? The point is just that revenue for subscription models recurs whereas build cost does not (handwave).

Yes? There are operational costs involved as well. It's not like a company fires half of their team after the product is launched.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#166

Post by yibg »

benatkin wrote: post #71

I'm grateful to GitLab for providing an alternative to GitHub, and an open source one. It's an open core product with the community edition providing a lot of value. Here are some community hosted instances: https://wiki.p2pfoundation.net/List_of_Community-Hosted_GitL... The CI system is quite powerful, and Travis CI's struggles before and after acquisition has shown that it's hard to host a major CI platform. I hope…

I really wanted to like gitlab, but have had so many reliability issues. The UI thinking the source branch doesn’t exist, CI jobs not running for hours etc.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#167

Post by reilly3000 »

INTPenis wrote: post #148
ignoramous wrote: post #112

Gitlab is one of the pioneers of "remote-first" [0] and "building in public" [1], to the extent of sometimes even live-streaming CEO meetings [2] and sales pitches [3] Gitlab, I believe, informs the common strategy behind most other source-available ycombinator enterprise startups: the buyer-based open-core model [4] Congratulations Gitlab. You're far from a copycat and deserve all the success for relentless executio…

Yeah I absolutely support Gitlab and love seeing new projects use Gitlab over Github. But to be fair, they have a massive backlog of issues to fix. Basic issues too, like variables not expanding correctly in CI jobs, or Google not being able to index projects on gitlab.com unless there's another page already linking to it. I've been using Gitlab.com and Gitlab on-prem since 2013 and over the years I've found many of…

With their business model, a constant stream of new features is the only thing that pays the bills. Their paid tiers get the new features, and almost all of them eventually wind up in the open product. With a healthy IPO they should be resourced enough to put some extra hands on the backlog. +1 for prioritizing old tickets!

Re: Gitlab S-1

#168

Post by Animats »

We have two classes of authorized common stock, Class A common stock and Class B common stock. The rights of the holders of Class A common stock and Class B common stock are identical, except with respect to voting and conversion rights. Each share of Class A common stock is entitled to one vote per share. Each share of Class B common stock is entitled to 10 votes per share and is convertible into one share of Class A common stock.

So who gets to be CEO for Life? Sid Sijbrandij?

Re: Gitlab S-1

#169

Post by mayurpipaliya »

One of my favorite company with the true remote/open culture.

GitHub is yet to match the features GitLab provides. - Especially small but interesting features such as Group / Sub-group, much mature SDK/API, Better CI, and Web based Folder creation.

Competition is healthy, it brings in more benefits for end users.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#170

Post by bevdecloud »

INTPenis wrote: post #148
ignoramous wrote: post #112

Gitlab is one of the pioneers of "remote-first" [0] and "building in public" [1], to the extent of sometimes even live-streaming CEO meetings [2] and sales pitches [3] Gitlab, I believe, informs the common strategy behind most other source-available ycombinator enterprise startups: the buyer-based open-core model [4] Congratulations Gitlab. You're far from a copycat and deserve all the success for relentless executio…

Yeah I absolutely support Gitlab and love seeing new projects use Gitlab over Github. But to be fair, they have a massive backlog of issues to fix. Basic issues too, like variables not expanding correctly in CI jobs, or Google not being able to index projects on gitlab.com unless there's another page already linking to it. I've been using Gitlab.com and Gitlab on-prem since 2013 and over the years I've found many of…

I have been using it for a couple months. You are very correct. I guess when are as open as they are it kind of gets lost in translation. Hopefully becoming a shareholder in a truly public company is the push for us to fix these kinds of issues.
Post reply on HN