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

261–270 of 295 posts

Re: Gitlab S-1

#261

Post by ksajadi »

mucholove wrote: post #256

Does anyone know how Gitlab went from being a Ducth BV to a US Inc? I see all of the founder's shares and options are owned by Rients.org BV and would love to know a bit more about the structure. Seems like EU companies eventually become American and I would love to know how :)

We did that in 2014. The process is straight forward and is called a Delaware flip (if I remember correctly): you setup a C-Corp in the US and then do a share flip for all share holders in the EU company to the same percentage in the US Corp. this will make the shareholders of the original company stock holders of the US one and the original company becomes a wholly owned subsidiary of the US one (or can be folded if no liabilities are left and no need for it exists)

Re: Gitlab S-1

#262

Post by Jochim »

I'm curious what other HN users think of Gitlab's pricing?

I was considering Gitlab when pitching a new platform for my org but the value really didn't seem to be there when compared to Atlassian/Microsoft.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#263

Post by The_rationalist »

Gitlab might be a great tool for proprietary/private software. But it is an utilitarian cancer for open source. So many important open sources projets have chosen Gitlab for political reasons and as a result result more than 10 time less open source contributions..

Re: Gitlab S-1

#264

Post by Gigachad »

trulyme wrote: post #259
Gigachad wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha that UI branch name thing is hilarious. Everyone at work has the same problem and has had it for the year and a half we have been using gitlab but the gitlab devs insist it doesn't happen for them. You can workaround it by pressing the right arrow at the end of the text.

I've been using GL at work for many years now and while it has many faults (the MR comment/thread/discussion UX is atrocious for example), I don't think I stumbled across this one. What is it about? (I still like GL, and I much prefer their CI to GH Actions - I just wish they would put more effort in improving existing features)

On that blue "create merge request" button on the issue page, there is a drop down arrow to let you pick a branch to start from. That text input is super buggy and often says the branch does not exist even if the name is correct.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#265

Post by secondaryacct »

sofixa wrote: post #132
secondaryacct wrote: post #64

I m in one of the companies they quoted as case study. The lies are so horrible I hesitate to do something: they fucked us completely replacing a wonderful github/teamcity combo, it crashes all the time, features are so amateurish (vs teamcity especially) that we're struggling just to do basic things. I dont know what to do, but public investors should stay away: the product is not ready for people to pay for it. It'…

Honestly sounds like an implementation issue. I've run multiple Gitlab instances and I've used some more, and "crashes all the time" isn't a thing that just happens. Most features work fine, core ones even more so, some of the newer ones are clearly not polished enough but mostly function. It's literally years in front of the competition ( GitHub and BitBucket).

How many thousands repos do you have ? We are 10k+ users with many many more repos scattered around the world.

But the thing I ll say is the git part is satisfactory. It's the CI part we are livid about.

It's not "years in front of the competition" if you think of Teamcity. Github focus on what it does right.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#266

Post by secondaryacct »

Chico75 wrote: post #215
secondaryacct wrote: post #64

I m in one of the companies they quoted as case study. The lies are so horrible I hesitate to do something: they fucked us completely replacing a wonderful github/teamcity combo, it crashes all the time, features are so amateurish (vs teamcity especially) that we're struggling just to do basic things. I dont know what to do, but public investors should stay away: the product is not ready for people to pay for it. It'…

I'm from another company quoted in a case study and can say the contrary overall. It does require work to properly scale for a few thousand of people if you run it yourself but it provides a lot of values for our developers to get their work done and require less maintenance than other SCM/CI systems we had to maintain in the past.

Are you one of these developers? Our management speak the same way of our infinite suffering during the migration ;)

You may betray yourself: developer dont maintain the CI system, they use it. And while I may accept it's now easier to maintain, why not, it's because it does less of what we need, possibly ?

Re: Gitlab S-1

#267

Post by sofixa »

secondaryacct wrote: post #265
sofixa wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly sounds like an implementation issue. I've run multiple Gitlab instances and I've used some more, and "crashes all the time" isn't a thing that just happens. Most features work fine, core ones even more so, some of the newer ones are clearly not polished enough but mostly function. It's literally years in front of the competition ( GitHub and BitBucket).

How many thousands repos do you have ? We are 10k+ users with many many more repos scattered around the world. But the thing I ll say is the git part is satisfactory. It's the CI part we are livid about. It's not "years in front of the competition" if you think of Teamcity. Github focus on what it does right.

I'd say 5-6k users, and the number of repos is easily between there and 10k on the biggest Gitlab instance I've used. The CI/CD part works well, including for complex multi-project dynamic pipelines. We don't have crashes, ever.

> It's not "years in front of the competition" if you think of Teamcity. Github focus on what it does right.

The competition for me is the all-in-one solutions like Github and Bitbucket. If you have to deploy, maintain and sometimes pay for an extra CI/CD solution, either something is wrong or you have very very specific requirements. What is it that TeamCity does better than Gitlab CI/CD?

Re: Gitlab S-1

#268

Post by secondaryacct »

kickopotomus wrote: post #141
secondaryacct wrote: post #64

I m in one of the companies they quoted as case study. The lies are so horrible I hesitate to do something: they fucked us completely replacing a wonderful github/teamcity combo, it crashes all the time, features are so amateurish (vs teamcity especially) that we're struggling just to do basic things. I dont know what to do, but public investors should stay away: the product is not ready for people to pay for it. It'…

> it crashes all the time, features are so amateurish (vs teamcity especially) that we're struggling just to do basic things. Do you have an on-prem instance? What sort of features does teamcity have that are not there in Gitlab CI? Teams in my org are currently switching from Gerrit/Jenkins combos to Gitlab and I have been pretty pleased so far. I do wish there was a nicer way to experiment with different CI configu…

Well gitlab has all the features of teamcity on paper: it can run a remote script and build any random thing.

But why do we need so much work to write the script ? Why is the reporting so bad on test failure, why building complex dependency chains running in parallel and in sequence doesnt work ? Why do we need to touch the repo to change the build descriptor?

It's just not as fun to use, immediate, beautiful, and productive. It's thrown on top of the git part, half assed.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#269

Post by heytherewhat »

foolfoolz wrote: post #214
statictype wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Twilio’s product is an API. The end-user of (most of) their products are developers.

the product is the communications. the people on the phone. reading sms. getting emails. the end user of twilio’s products probably have never heard of twilio and don’t even know their using it

And their product is for developers.

Are you trying to claim that AWS is not for developers because the end users who visit website hosted on AWS are not developers?

Re: Gitlab S-1

#270

Post by mucholove »

ksajadi wrote: post #261
mucholove wrote: post #256

Does anyone know how Gitlab went from being a Ducth BV to a US Inc? I see all of the founder's shares and options are owned by Rients.org BV and would love to know a bit more about the structure. Seems like EU companies eventually become American and I would love to know how :)

We did that in 2014. The process is straight forward and is called a Delaware flip (if I remember correctly): you setup a C-Corp in the US and then do a share flip for all share holders in the EU company to the same percentage in the US Corp. this will make the shareholders of the original company stock holders of the US one and the original company becomes a wholly owned subsidiary of the US one (or can be folded if…

Super. Would be very interested to know if this is possible with a Spanish company. From hearsay, Spain is supposed to be way harder than Netherlands or UK.

Thanks!

Post reply on HN