GitLab vs Inedo BuildMaster comparison

"The code merging capability is something that we use very frequently."

"I find the features and version control history to be most valuable for our development workflow. These aspects provide us with a clear view of changes and help us manage requests efficiently."

"The SaaS setup is impressive, and it has DAST solutioning."

"We have seen a couple of merge requests or pull requests raised in GitLab. I see the interface, the way it shows the difference between the two source codes, that it is easy for anyone to do the review and then accept the request; the pull request is the valuable feature."

"GitLab's best features are continuous integration and fast deployment."

"This is a scalable solution. We had around 200 users working with it."

"I like that it's easy to deploy our services over GitLab. The customer support is also good with a really active community. You have a lot of support that you can get online with your stack. That is probably one of the benefits of using GitLab. It's also really fast."

"A user friendly solution."

"Technical support is quick to respond. I haven't had any issues with them."

"The licensing model could be improved to be more accommodating in terms of user numbers and costs."

"GitLab should work on improving their user interface for GitOps as it is lagging behind."

"We'd like to see better integration with the Atlassian ecosystem."

"Reporting could be improved."

"Some of the scripts that we encountered in GitLab were not fully functional and threw up errors."

"It could have more security integrations and the ability to check the vulnerability of the code. I don't think it is a responsibility of Gitlab, but it would be nice to have more options to integrate with."

"The pricing has been substantially increased, which is a major concern."

"It would be better if there weren't any outages. There are occasions where we usually see a lot of outages using GitLab. It happens at least once a week or something like that. Whatever pipelines you're running, to check the logs, you need to have a different set of tools like Argus or something like that. If you have pipelines running on GitLab, you need a separate service deployed to view the logs, which is kind of a pain. If the logs can be used conveniently on GitLab, that would be definitely helpful. I'm not talking about the CI/CD pipelines but the back-end services and microservices deployed over GitLab. To view the logs for those microservices, you need to have separate log viewers, which is kind of a pain."

"The documentation should be better. It should be very easy to call REST APIs, and the documentation has to be perfect for that."

"We are using its free version, and we are evaluating its Premium version. Its Ultimate version is very expensive."

"We are currently using the open-source version."

"GitLab is comparatively expensive, but it provides value because it's feature-rich."

"The price of GitLab could be better, it is expensive."

"In terms of the pricing for GitLab, on a scale of one to five, with one being expensive and five being cheap, I'm rating pricing for the solution a four. It could still be cheaper because right now, my company has a small team, and sometimes it's difficult to use a paid product for a small team. You'd hope the team will grow and scale, but currently, you're paying a high license fee for a small team. I'm referring to the GitLab license that has premium features and will give you all features. This can be a problem for management to approve the high price of the license for a team this small."

"The open-source version is very good and the commercial version is reasonably priced."

"My company uses the free version of GitLab, which is GitLab Community Edition. There is a licensed version also available for GitLab."

"The solution is based on a licensing model that includes technical support and is paid annually."