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

281–290 of 295 posts

Re: Gitlab S-1

#281

Post by trulyme »

Gigachad wrote: post #264
trulyme wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Interesting, I never noticed because I usually make a MR from the link I get when I do a git push (which I find super useful btw). It does sound like a myriad other smallish annoyances. Thanks for describing it!

Re: Gitlab S-1

#282

Post by rossmohax »

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 can only be true if you had experience with Gitlab CI 5 years ago and compare with current Github Action offering. There is no way a person who actually build CI pipelines in Gitlab and Github today can call Github a winner.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#283

Post by nine_k »

amyjess wrote: post #277
nine_k wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're a software developer, have you tried to find a job in last, like, 20 years? While doing so, you likely noticed how many recruiters are interested in you. There is a serious deficit of software developers, the industry is striving to hire much more that currently available. If they can now make up their mind and keep hiring remotely, the will market grow a lot, but equally will grow the desires, see Jevons P…

> While doing so, you likely noticed how many recruiters are interested in you. I'd appreciate that more if not for the fact that I regularly get emails and cold calls from recruiters who do the following: - ...want me for a job that has zilch to do with my skillset. I'm an SRE and a general infrastructure engineer. 90% the jobs I get calls about are for frontend stuff and/or involve languages I've never touched. Wan…

This all shows a huge underserved market.

Because of its being underserved, we're in a privileged position to ask more money, better hours, longer-term contracts, etc. Compare that to the situation of warehouse workers or ride-hailing drivers, where the situation is opposite.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#284

Post by rossmohax »

shortstuffsushi wrote: post #92
nawgz wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a big shop - I work on a team on the order of 10 We use GitLab as our "one place to do the entire software development lifecycle". It's a really good CI/CD runner in my opinion, the .gitlab-ci.yml files are expressive and enable reuse thru a pretty nice inheritance model, and integrating new service (container) builds is literally 4 lines of code to have every push build a new container and put it in GitLab…

> we can drop 4 lines into an JS/TS repo and have it publish Could you talk a bit about this, or link out to any docs they've got for this? I'm curious about setting that up

You don't even need to do that. Gitlab has repository configuration option to take CI config from another place. So you can have code only repo being built by a CI pipeline described elsewhere.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#285

Post by rossmohax »

Koffiepoeder wrote: post #243
anonymoustrolol wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

152% NDR tells me they should either buy as many customers as possible right now (IE burn), or they are under pricing and should raise prices and increase revenue that way. Cash flow on its own is kinda meaningless.

They did quite recently [0]. The bronze plan (4/user/mo) was burned and moved into premium (19/user/mo). If you have any sort of moderately active company, going back to free tier is really not an option (the feature reduction would be simply too much, plus a lot of previous ci/cd work would be binned). [0] https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2021/01/26/new-gitlab-product-...

only CI related feature previously available on bronze, but not on free anymore is branch protection. Rest of bronze CI should work just fine.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#286

Post by yibg »

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)

Some times when trying to merge in a MR, the UI will say the source branch doesn’t exist so the MR can’t be merged. Wait a bit and it usually resolves itself. But it’s super annoying when you are in a rush.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#288

Post by aritraghosh007 »

wdb wrote: post #213
mayurpipaliya wrote: post #169

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.

Personally, I think Gitlab needs to match with features of Github and its reliability.

Curious what are some of the top features GH has which GL doesn’t?

Re: Gitlab S-1

#289

Post by sam0x17 »

tinyhouse wrote: post #224
sam0x17 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will be interesting to see how many publicly traded companies are fully remote in 5, 10, 15 years. I'm willing to take that bet. I've already suggested in numerous places on HN (pre-pandemic) that the commercial real estate market itself is going to collapse in the next 10 years because in a remote economy, office spaces have zero or even negative value, and I do see us gradually moving in that direction. Even task…

I partly disagree. There will be high demand for co-working spaces because employees like to go to the office once you remove the cons (commute, sitting next to your boss, etc). Companies will gladly pay for that too. Commercial buildings will just convert to co-working spaces. I do see a problem for the centers where there's a high concentration of commercial buildings, esp if they are not nearby residential neighbo…

Right but that's assuming 100% of employees even want a co-working space when it's more like 40% if that. That would leave 60% of office building space still vacant, which would be enough to make most landlords / CRE brokers default after a few years.

Re: Gitlab S-1

#290

Post by sam0x17 »

gaadd33 wrote: post #218
sam0x17 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Will be interesting to see how many publicly traded companies are fully remote in 5, 10, 15 years. I'm willing to take that bet. I've already suggested in numerous places on HN (pre-pandemic) that the commercial real estate market itself is going to collapse in the next 10 years because in a remote economy, office spaces have zero or even negative value, and I do see us gradually moving in that direction. Even task…

Just wondering, how do you convert the large office buildings to residential when (at least in much of the US) a bedroom requires a window? A lot of office buildings have a lot more internal space then anything close to a window. It seems like that leads to long narrow shotgun type apartments.

It very well might. This would vary heavily on a per-building basis. Perhaps some buildings would simply go vacant.
Post reply on HN