31–40 of 68 posts
Can someone who has used both this and Gitlab provide an insight on how the experiences differ?
GHE is very social, GitLab never had that feel for me. Same feature set, really.
"Configuration runs no longer use Chef and are much faster and more reliable." What replaced Chef?
Can someone who has used both this and Gitlab provide an insight on how the experiences differ?
My major gripe with GitLab is that it's really hard to navigate around. There are lots of links that take you somewhere other than what you'd expect. The landing page for projects is the log, you have to click a tab to see README and file structure, which I've always found clunky.
EDIT: also, GitLab's syntax highlighter gets really confused if a search result snippet starts in the middle of a string. Never seen that problem on GitHub, but it could be there, too.
Just my 2c.
Can someone who has used both this and Gitlab provide an insight on how the experiences differ?
The issue I have ALWAYS had with GHE isn't with GHE itself but with how organisations use it, there are usually dozens of organisations that make little sense and 1000's of repos that are often empty or abandoned. It becomes a black box of repos that no one really knows the ends of.
The real improvements GitHub could make to GHE is improve the discoverability experience, it's UI/UX is inherited from public Github where people work in small(ish) groups on single projects within individual orgs. This, for me, is not the paradigm people employ in GHE.
Can someone who has used both this and Gitlab provide an insight on how the experiences differ?
GHE requires a lot more resources then GitLab (8GB/4cores min) and anything lower slows it to a crawl, which is a shame. Luckily there's now an AWS image which makes it significantly easier (deploying it now). GHE is very social, GitLab never had that feel for me. Same feature set, really.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why Ubuntu over Debian, out of curiosity? I've seen Spotify switch from Debian to Ubuntu and regretting it already.
I was part of the Ubuntu decision at GitHub, and it was based on the fact that Ubuntu gave you much longer support after the next release. Debian (at the time) only guaranteed even security updates on previous releases for one year after a new release.
I am asking, because Debian is a community project and in the end it gives what its community members are putting in. I am wondering about the amount of effort necessary.
It seems that they estimate it at one person, full time [1]. Which does not seem a lot, given the number of organizations that use Debian.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
intentional ui
It's very likely buried at the bottom of features since it's the thing that's likely to make some shy away even before they see all the good features. Edit: In all honesty though, even though it does seem expensive, if you have 20 seats (20 developers), your payroll is already on the order of $1MM+, so $5k a year is almost a margin of error at that point, considering those devs use it all day every day.
Can someone who has used both this and Gitlab provide an insight on how the experiences differ?
Currently, my startup is using GitLab. It does the job for the 16 or so developers we have. It has issue tracking, wiki, web hooks, merge requests. Pretty much all the same features as GitHub, but not as clean or pretty.