Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab • Hacker News Board

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#61

Post by jchw » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

ModernMech wrote: post #41

jchw wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, Gitlab is a web platform. It's pretty easy to test how it's going to work on different platforms without needing full machines. Heck, you can even just get Microsoft Edge binaries on macOS and Linux if you want to test Edge. But failing that, VMs are pretty sufficient.

Gitlab ships various ci runner executables for all platforms. I use their Windows ci runner and it works well, but I wonder how they test it without running windows.

This policy about which OS your laptop runs does not seem to preclude the use of Windows VMs (and presumably CI runners, though I bet we could see if that was the case ourselves) if it were needed. The open source nature of Gitlab also makes it easy for a developer to test things on an unprivileged personal device, I'd imagine.

If that was not enough, I believe the CI runner is written in the Go programming language, which has a surprisingly decent abstraction of OS functionality in it's standard library. Imperfect as it may be, I suspect that helps reduce the amount of effort needed to ensure individual platforms work properly.

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#62

Post by milkshakes » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

ModernMech wrote: post #41

jchw wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, Gitlab is a web platform. It's pretty easy to test how it's going to work on different platforms without needing full machines. Heck, you can even just get Microsoft Edge binaries on macOS and Linux if you want to test Edge. But failing that, VMs are pretty sufficient.

Gitlab ships various ci runner executables for all platforms. I use their Windows ci runner and it works well, but I wonder how they test it without running windows.

This is a policy for personal workstations. Presumably, there is a different policy for QA/CI environments.

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#63

Post by ziddoap » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

arkitaip wrote: post #17

habnds wrote: post #3

>> GitLab approves the use of Linux, and Apple's macOS. Microsoft Windows is prohibited for the following reasons: Due to Microsoft Windows' dominance in desktop operating systems, Windows is the platform most targetted by spyware, viruses, and ransomware. macOS is preinstalled on Apple computers and Linux is available free of charge. To approve the use of Windows, GitLab would have to purchase Windows Professional l…

I haven't had problems with viruses, spyware and ransomware on Windows for years. Microsoft's builtin spyware marketed as telemetry and diagnostics otoh is very difficult to counter even with dedicated tools like O&O ShutUp10. I get why companies don't want to risk giving business secrets to Microsoft.

>I haven't had problems with viruses, spyware and ransomware on Windows for years.

That's great and all, but I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. That there isn't a problem of malware/ransomware? Because there certainly is, and for most organizations the risk of malware/ransomware is much more significant than the fact that Windows gets some error reporting and usage statistics and such.

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#64

Post by aikah » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

ModernMech wrote: post #41

jchw wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, Gitlab is a web platform. It's pretty easy to test how it's going to work on different platforms without needing full machines. Heck, you can even just get Microsoft Edge binaries on macOS and Linux if you want to test Edge. But failing that, VMs are pretty sufficient.

Gitlab ships various ci runner executables for all platforms. I use their Windows ci runner and it works well, but I wonder how they test it without running windows.

> Gitlab ships various ci runner executables for all platforms. I use their Windows ci runner and it works well, but I wonder how they test it without running windows.

Maybe with a Windows VM.

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#65

Post by Etheryte » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

jrochkind1 wrote: post #43

ironmagma wrote: post #8

This is being posted just a day after this tweet: https://twitter.com/allenholub/status/1555324387087097856 I really wonder what it's like inside Gitlab. The product ticks all the boxes you'd want it to, but the user experience just resonates with sadness and misery.

Woah, that tweet led me to: "GitLab plans to automatically delete projects if they've been inactive for a year and are owned by users of its free tier." Which I hadn't heard. That's.... something.

If I'm not mistaken they rolled this idea back real quick once it leaked and everyone got mad.

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#66

Post by Diggsey » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

jchw wrote: post #25

horsawlarway wrote: post #9

I'm no fan of Windows myself, but I find this a fairly bad policy. If nothing else - what's not used is not tested. And if you expect any real population of users to be using Windows machines with your products, you should have developers/PMs/QA/support interacting with your products using Windows machines. I see this as: We're saving a bit of money and making ITs life easier, and in exchange users will get a worse p…

I mean, Gitlab is a web platform. It's pretty easy to test how it's going to work on different platforms without needing full machines. Heck, you can even just get Microsoft Edge binaries on macOS and Linux if you want to test Edge. But failing that, VMs are pretty sufficient.

Tell that to the FE devs who add `overflow: scroll` everywhere and don't spot the problem...

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#67

Post by lbotos » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

ironmagma wrote: post #8

This is being posted just a day after this tweet: https://twitter.com/allenholub/status/1555324387087097856 I really wonder what it's like inside Gitlab. The product ticks all the boxes you'd want it to, but the user experience just resonates with sadness and misery.

I work there. (And have for the last 5 years.) Obviously I can't divulge anything confidential, but ask a more specific question and I'm happy to answer from my vantage.

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#68

Post by mikeryan » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:45 PM UTC

Xylakant wrote: post #21

habnds wrote: post #3

>> GitLab approves the use of Linux, and Apple's macOS. Microsoft Windows is prohibited for the following reasons: Due to Microsoft Windows' dominance in desktop operating systems, Windows is the platform most targetted by spyware, viruses, and ransomware. macOS is preinstalled on Apple computers and Linux is available free of charge. To approve the use of Windows, GitLab would have to purchase Windows Professional l…

I‘m a bit surprised that they care about the cost so much - the Dell laptops and the Apple Laptops come in at a price point of 2000 - 3000 USD and the Dell they specifically recommend for Linux use comes with Windows Pro preinstalled. The price difference to the equivalent Linux version is around 70USD. That‘s a negligible difference, especially when you start comparing to the employees wage (It‘s probably about 1 ho…

Where did they mention cost concerns? I’m reading this that it’s an IT/procurement hassle dealing with the Windows Pro upgrade licenses, on a platform they don’t feel is secure, not a cost issue.

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#69

Post by Xylakant » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:46 PM UTC

jhickok wrote: post #46

Xylakant wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most windows laptops today come with a license key baked into the BIOS. So no need to manage licenses here.

I do not believe those are sufficient for enterprise licenses, which must be provided separately.

They are sufficient for pro licenses, though, which are what they mention as the required baseline.

Re: Microsoft Windows is prohibited at Gitlab

#70

Post by icedchai » Fri, Aug 05, 2022, 2:46 PM UTC

202206241203 wrote: post #19

icedchai wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume this is sarcasm. They are a public company with a multi billion dollar market cap.

I guess you are right, it looks even worse then... Where is that money even going.

Employees aren't cheap.