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

Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 220 posts

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#61

Post by voganmother42 »

mgl wrote: post #48
viraptor wrote: post #46

I'm annoyed that they don't want my money. I'm a really basic user and try to keep my private and public stuff there instead of GitHub. I fit in a free tier and would happily pay maybe $5 for it. But I wasn't going to spend $20 and definitely won't spend $30. Come on GitLab, I want to keep using you and see you succeed. Let me pay $5 for some token feature like extra GB of space and to vote with my money to keep you…

Well, $30 mo is just $1 a day. Depending on where you live it can be nothing.

This really misses the mark. They compete with free also, which is always nothing.

Github by comparison lets me pay like 5$/mo for LFS and 4$/mo for a team of one, bitbucket even lets you do up to 5 users for a total of 15$/mo , gitlab has nothing like that :(

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#62

Post by ajb »

nimbius wrote: post #21

things like github and gitlab always struck me as oddities. it costs virtually nothing to deploy a containerized gitea and jenkins, or gitlab CE, and you have direct control over its performance and options without any spend. call me old fashioned but these online git-o-matic sites just seem more like rent-seeking during a recession.

The first startup I joined, which was 12 people 20 years ago, had our own servers and an IT guy who took the alternate backup tapes home personally. When you have that, running as many services as possible locally, instead of paying for them, makes sense as you are increasing the value you get out of your operational capacity.

I now work in a start-up of 40 people, we don't have any servers or dedicated IT or DevOps staff. All admin gets done in the spare time of a couple of engineers, who have no desire to further lose their development time to admin/ops. It makes more sense to pay a subscription and let someone else deal with it. Even for the backend guys running that kind of service is more operationally complex than most of what they do - no-one has the experience of operating 'pets' class servers.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#63

Post by metadat »

robbintt wrote: post #58
swyx wrote: post #42

in their earnings call @sytses also announced that he has cancer but is powering thru it working full time even while he receives chemotherapy. snippet: https://twitter.com/OnodaCapital/status/1635379330498060289 wishing him the best of health. he inspires me constantly.

[flagged]

For some people, keeping things as normal as possible in challenging circumstances helps them get through it.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#64

Post by imiric »

vorpalhex wrote: post #31
stavros wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This comment strikes me as fundamentally misunderstanding the purpose of GitHub. I don't care that I can set up Gitea (and I already have an instance), I want GitHub because it makes it trivial for people to issue PRs to my code. Then, because everyone has a GitHub account and knows how to use it, and everyone is already on it, everyone else goes on it too. Not to mention that I don't need to maintain CI/container re…

There was an attempt to bring a distributed forge architecture to gitea and co. The idea being the project could be hosted on one instance but you could fork to your own to do your work before PRing back to the project. Github but bring your own. I believe the project died out but it was a good idea. All the benefits of Github without the lock in and single point of failure.

Git already has a distributed workflow for submitting patches: email[1].

Ultimately a "pull request" is just that; a request for someone to pull your branch into theirs. You can already add Git remotes from different services, review the changes locally, and collaborate over email. GitHub et al simply add a nicer UI for this, but there's no reason why you couldn't make a PR from one service to another. If only they'd be willing to interoperate, which is the biggest hurdle.

I'm not familiar with why that Gitea project failed, but I imagine that making this work for multiple instances of a single OSS project would be much easier.

[1]: https://www.git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Distributed-Git-Contribut...

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#65

Post by swyx »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #57
swyx wrote: post #42

in their earnings call @sytses also announced that he has cancer but is powering thru it working full time even while he receives chemotherapy. snippet: https://twitter.com/OnodaCapital/status/1635379330498060289 wishing him the best of health. he inspires me constantly.

[flagged]

hey, please have some tact. sid is a very active part of our community and almost certainly reading this post. dont say anything here you wouldnt say to a friend's face especially in his time of vulnerability.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#66

Post by mgl »

voganmother42 wrote: post #61
mgl wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, $30 mo is just $1 a day. Depending on where you live it can be nothing.

This really misses the mark. They compete with free also, which is always nothing. Github by comparison lets me pay like 5$/mo for LFS and 4$/mo for a team of one, bitbucket even lets you do up to 5 users for a total of 15$/mo , gitlab has nothing like that :(

I feel your pain, we all get used to super cheap development services. But now - well - there is no free lunch as they say, and I think we should stop demanding much for nothing.

Would they make money on $5 accounts? Does github make money on $4 accounts? Is it a sustainable pricing model or more like a “growth grab” which is not valued that much in 2023.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#67

Post by medstrom »

harrisonjackson wrote: post #51
activitypea wrote: post #32

As much as I love the product, I've really come to dislike Gitlab as a company. The constant price hikes and the gutting of the free tier aren't exactly developer-friendly.

It is especially annoying because of how transparent they are about it. You can follow along in merge requests and issues as they discuss exactly this.

Why does transparency annoy you?

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#68

Post by megous »

DoesntMatter22 wrote: post #57
swyx wrote: post #42

in their earnings call @sytses also announced that he has cancer but is powering thru it working full time even while he receives chemotherapy. snippet: https://twitter.com/OnodaCapital/status/1635379330498060289 wishing him the best of health. he inspires me constantly.

[flagged]

Having cancer while poor sucks even more.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#69

Post by stefan_ »

sophiabits wrote: post #56
aynyc wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was GitLab ahead of GitHub? I've been using both for as long as I remember, I always thought GitLab is more marketing than GitHub. Believe or not, I prefer BitBucket because I don't care much for CI integrations.

While you might not value it, GitLab’s CI story was for a long time way better than GitHub and even a number of dedicated CI/CD providers. If you want to build and deploy microservices from a monorepo independently based on what changed in a PR, for instance, then GitLab supports that out of the box whereas you need to hack something together yourself on Buildkite. GitHub actions has significantly reduced the gap, an…

Meh, there is something to be said for having "anything" over "nothing", but as with many of GitLab features, you inevitably found yourself deep down some years old issue of theirs to find why something is broken or obviously nonsensical. That's before they went batshit insane on development of even more unfinished stuff, while the core ergonomics (Lint CI button anyone?) continue to border on unusable.

Ironically GitHub actions are now the vastly superior experience, despite the lack of bullshit checkbox features. Turns out you don't need so many of them beyond the basic "run something on a worker" flow.

Re: Gitlab loses one-third of its value after company issues weak forecast

#70

Post by gregwebs »

Gitlab pricing used to be something like $4/mo and they saw incredible growth. They raised their rates to $19/mo and now are seeing slow growth. In April they are raising to $29/mo- not sure what they think is going to happen. Also, for anyone that actively watches, they have to wonder if there will be another price hike once you are on their platform.

Github Enterprise is only $21/mo and for most users it has all the same features of Gitlab.

Gitlab's main differentiator for a long time was CI, but now Github has its own equivalent (Actions).

It seems that Gitlab is only going to be left with 1) existing Gitlab users 2) users that want some enterprise feature set that doesn't exist on Github, and want it in a single platform without a third party

Post reply on HN