Live data from Hacker News

Gitlab reducing free tier CI/CD minutes from 2000 to 400 minutes

about.gitlab.com

171–176 of 176 posts

Re: Gitlab reducing free tier CI/CD minutes from 2000 to 400 minutes

#171
post #41

Their existing policy has never made sense to me. You can only give away so much stuff on a free plan. I don't think CI/CD is cheap. Buying extra minutes for $10 (not per month) is completely reasonable. At some point I feel uncomfortable using a free plan that is obviously unsustainable.

I think a good free tier still makes sense as long as it seems sustainable overall. For example, if a lot of people are willing to pay for at least a basic plan, I feel a little better. I think for CI/CD having a generous free tier is great because it makes it easier for people to get started and really dig into a project, not to mention the obvious benefit to open source that works as a continuous PR machine. Practi…

draw.io _does_ have a paid tier for its JIRA/Confluence integration[0].

[0]: https://marketplace.atlassian.com/apps/1210933/draw-io-diagr...

Re: Gitlab reducing free tier CI/CD minutes from 2000 to 400 minutes

#172
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is there an equivalent of `ccache` for Rust? For C++ it's been a total lifesaver, I've introduced it in multiple organizations for massively reducing (average) build times, even by sharing the cache on an NFS drive between multiple machines.

https://github.com/mozilla/sccache

Note the caveats though. In particular it can't cache Serde, which is easily the slowest popular crate to compile. Also the heavy use of static dispatch and LTO in Rust means a lot of the actually compilation happens in the final crate which is usually the one you modified.

It definitely helps but not as much as in C++.

Re: Gitlab reducing free tier CI/CD minutes from 2000 to 400 minutes

#173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plus Rust by design avoids all sorts of bugs leading to less tests imo. Python for example you really want a lot of testing, maybe even contracts, but with Rust I find that many of those tests are irrelevant.

> Plus Rust by design avoids all sorts of bugs leading to less tests imo. This assertion on the amount to tests makes no sense at all. Tests are not about language features. Tests are about checking invariantes, checking input and output bounds, and checking behavior. Tests focus on the interface, not the implementation. Tests only work if test coverage is high.

It makes total sense. Rust statically enforces many things you'd have to explicitly test for in other languages, for example types. So you don't need to write as many tests.

Re: Gitlab reducing free tier CI/CD minutes from 2000 to 400 minutes

#174
I see a lot of comments citing gitlab as devious or showing statistical lies. The basic point is that gitlab is a business that is competing in an area where competitors have infinite pockets. GitHub can allow users to use 2000 minutes and even make it free for teams because Microsoft has a huge war chest. Gitlab on the other hand is valued at 1/1000 and has to be profitable to survive.

Re: Gitlab reducing free tier CI/CD minutes from 2000 to 400 minutes

#175

Does anyone know how to see historical runner usage on GitLab? I'm digging into the interface, and I only see current month usage, no ability to go back to previous months. With this reduction news, I thought the interface would have updated with better details.

GitLab PM here. We will enable view of previous months' usage in this issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/246844

Re: Gitlab reducing free tier CI/CD minutes from 2000 to 400 minutes

#176
post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rise is a bit much. We barely think of the public facing Bitbucket or Sourceforge. I bet both are bigger than Sourcehut still.

I was rooting for Bitbucket and Mercurial 7 years ago. Shame.

I was rooting for Mercurial or any other to get a minority but significant market share. I don’t like mono cultures. Ah well.
Post reply on HN