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

Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

about.gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 300 posts

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#171

Post by temac »

xrd wrote: post #117

One of my favorite Mad magazine cartoons has this patient sitting with his dentist. The dentist tells him the cost of the dental work, and the payment plans for it. The patient says "sounds like I'm buying a car!" The dentist replies: "Yes, I am!" I think some of the comments here are confused about how pricing works and why GitLab is doing it. And, IMHO, there is so much value in even the free open source version th…

Of course you can, it would not be open source / free software otherwise. (Yes, some people are attempting to redefine "open source" to other meanings, but gitlab does no such thing and Open Source GitLab is truly Open Source)

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#172

Post by TavsiE9s »

leipert wrote: post #105
jeswin wrote: post #6

I cannot find if project-scoped access tokens (which was a Bronze+ feature) are available in the Free tier, or whether they require Silver. It's such a glaring omission on GitHub - which only has personal access tokens which give apps full access to all your repos.

GitLab employee here. Just asked the Product Manager responsible. Project Access Tokens [0] will be available on Premium for GitLab.com and available on Free for self-hosted. [0]: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/settings/project_acc...

But not in the CE?

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#173

Post by joshgachnang »

time0ut wrote: post #136
tentacleuno wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was your experience with Jira?

I use a couple dozen tools on a regular basis. JIRA is by far the worst. The functionality is ok. Maybe it is a bit bloated. Maybe our process is a little over complicated. That's not a big deal. The thing that really gets me is performance. The performance is absolute dog shit. Every interaction with it painfully slow. For example, the page to view a single issue is almost 20MB fetched over 100 HTTP requests and tak…

Nope. We _just_ switched to Jira/Confluence from Notion+Trello (sigh), so we really don't have a complicated set up, and it is definitely "absolute dog shit" for performance. It is hands down the slowest tool I use. I've used it at large organizations with hundreds of devs and it's even worse. I regret not pushing back harder, since it is totally overkill for 1.5 PMs managing 3.5 devs.

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#174

Post by TavsiE9s »

raro11 wrote: post #48

We have a small development team (20) but 100+ clients that have reporter role. We are in the process of moving out some clients so we could use Starter. Premium was too expensive because reporters count as a user and guests are only free in Ultimate. So now we are looking for alternatives, which sucks because as a developer I really liked Gitlab. Does anyone have any recommendations?

Depends on your requirements to be honest. I’ve used gitea in the past and was very happy with it.

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#176

Post by Gene_Parmesan »

time0ut wrote: post #136
tentacleuno wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How was your experience with Jira?

I use a couple dozen tools on a regular basis. JIRA is by far the worst. The functionality is ok. Maybe it is a bit bloated. Maybe our process is a little over complicated. That's not a big deal. The thing that really gets me is performance. The performance is absolute dog shit. Every interaction with it painfully slow. For example, the page to view a single issue is almost 20MB fetched over 100 HTTP requests and tak…

Seconding the performance issues. This is obviously amplified when screen sharing, which makes certain types of collaboration difficult. (Remote grooming sessions, for instance.) I also find recent UI changes have made the product harder to use, at least for our version and processes, and have added nothing of value in return.

As far as how useful Jira is, a huge percentage of that is going to be your team's processes external to Jira. I have found it to be a very good mirror. If your team's processes are a mess, your Jira instance will quickly become one as well. But if your team is organized and is bringing an existing, functional system to Jira, I have found that it's a good enough value add to be worth it.

It's definitely an enabler, though, rather than a tool that will funnel you into good practices. (The same can be said for Confluence but it's even more true there IMO.)

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#177

Post by TheRealPomax »

O5vYtytb wrote: post #145

We just recently purchased a license (~200 users) for self-hosted "starter". There was no mention of a change to the pricing models, and this forced change to "premium" doesn't add any value for us. The things that would give us value include multi-level epics, but "ultimate" is just way too expensive. Very disappointed in this direction from Gitlab. I'll be advocating for us to switch platforms.

If you were on starter anyway, why would you this affect you? Just keeping using free?

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#178

Post by shagie »

jvalencia wrote: post #29
shagie wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question for Premium to Ultimate is "are you using GitLab for project and requirements management?" For that, the ultimate tier is now competing with a Jira suite, or something that PMs use made by Microsoft or a similar type of product. The licensing for the project management tool can easily run $50+/month/user Add in the "business/customer access to the issue tracking" and if you've got Jira or similar, that a…

The thing that killed ultimate for us was the fact that there was no ticket manager only role. Why pay 100/mo for a product manager who just fills out tickets. It's absurd.

The permission model that GitLab has is one of the disappointing things about it and part of the reason we went with a different product for issue management (and I frequently grump about it). I'd really like to be able to define my own roles and assign different actions that that role can do.

I feel that it wasn't made to host enterprise products but rather FOSS in competition with GitHub and then made a pivot to enterprise products but not quite moving away from the "this is for FOSS on the web".

Things like "can modify own comments" not being something that can be modified (people updating their own comments and then not being able to go back over it for an audit or information request of some sort) or having a manager role that can administer the members of a project but not the code.

And yea... having to pay $100/month for a product/project manager in a larger org is a rather firm "nope." Have a dozen of those and that's a lot to pay for not much functionality.

A previous company that I worked at... there was a project manager. Just one. It was a small company - I sat across from the other Java developer. In there, were you've got a small organization where $100/month for a PM is a lot to swallow, but its only $100/month for one PM (and then you get all the other features that saves you from having to hire another operations person) - that's not as hard a price to swallow.

There the thing would be "ok, we've got 10 people at $20/month and all this other stuff that we need to set up on our own, so $200/month vs 11 people at $100/month and a bunch that we don't need to set up on our own $1100" -- the "is it worth $900 for the rest of the infrastructure done for us - along with dumping trello for gitlab issues" and the answer would probably be "yes."

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#179

Post by StavrosK »

viraptor wrote: post #165
ShakataGaNai wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea. Love gitlab but the pricing does add up quickly. Even if with all the features, it's really hard to get value out of Gold/Ultimate. When I add up all the major SaaS apps an average user has: SSO, Email, Chat, Storage, Zoom, Support. Combined, GitLab Ultimate costs 2-3x that. And I promise you that as much as we all hate a messy inbox, email is more broadly useful than GitLab. The other problem with ultimate is t…

> The $100/user/month model It's not a high number of accounts before you can have a person dedicated 50% of the time to just running a local gitlab setup with any options you want. Including infra costs + on-demand CI/CD.

How would that help? You still have to pay the license fee...

Re: Gitlab is moving to a three-tier product subscription model

#180

Post by O5vYtytb »

TheRealPomax wrote: post #177
O5vYtytb wrote: post #145

We just recently purchased a license (~200 users) for self-hosted "starter". There was no mention of a change to the pricing models, and this forced change to "premium" doesn't add any value for us. The things that would give us value include multi-level epics, but "ultimate" is just way too expensive. Very disappointed in this direction from Gitlab. I'll be advocating for us to switch platforms.

If you were on starter anyway, why would you this affect you? Just keeping using free?

Gitlab didn't make all starter features part of the free tier. Now we're forced to pay for premium without gaining any features relevant for our team.

Edit: FYI starter was previously a paid tier.

Post reply on HN