GitLab Reviews

GitLab is a solution for source code management, container registry, pipelines, testing, and deployment.

The problem with Git is that it's a solution for managing your source code history. But with Git, you can edit the history, which is not ideal.

Another issue is the pricing model of GitLab. 

I have been using GitLab for more than a year. I am using the latest version. 

It is a stable solution. I would rate it a ten out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. I would scalability rate it a ten out of ten. 

I used GitHub. GitHub did not have a container registry or testing, and it is owned by Microsoft, which raises concerns about ethics. All my decisions are based on ethics. 

The initial setup is reasonably okay. Moreover, it's already in the cloud, so I didn't need to deploy it. 

There is no deployment or maintenance staff required. 

The pricing is a bit high. I'm still on the free plan, but if I wanted to buy it, the pricing would be a bit high. There are not any additional costs associated with the standard license.

GitLab is a good solution. Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. I would say it's better than GitHub.

Our company uses the solution as a repository manager for our best code, to set up CI/CD pipelines, and to build projects and get architects. We build code and generate artifacts that we push to UrbanCode for deployment. 

For one use case, we created an entire CI/CD pipeline that deploys code to the artifact and Target Server. This deployment was our first using the solution and included a lot of scripting. The customer has 250 current users that includes maintenance, owners, and developers.

Eventually, we plan to use the solution for all deployments. 

The user interface is really good so that helps with huge teams who need to collaborate. 

The solution is great for SCM, depository management, building, and CI/CD.

The solution does not have many built-in functions or variables so scripting is required and that is a drawback. For example, it would be nice to have a button on the interface for setting up environments in meta folders. 

I have been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. Performance comes down slightly when multiple pipelines for a complex project are triggered at once. I rate performance a seven out of ten. 

We use the solution on-premises so do not scale in the way others do on the cloud. 

Technical support is very quick. I raised two tickets and and they followed up regularly which was great. 

Our company currently uses UrbanCode for deployments. Eventually, we want to conduct all deployments in the solution. 

The setup is straightforward so I rate it an eight out of ten. 

Our company includes a four-person deployment team who implements the solution for customers. 

Our internal team handles maintenance of our GitLab server. Every month, we download, install, and publish patches or upgrades to our community. 

The solution is based on a licensing model that includes technical support and is paid annually. Our company currently has between 430 to 480 licenses. 

The solution is newer to the market so other tools with longevity such as Jenkins are more popular. The solution is slowly emerging as its potential as a complete CI/CD setup becomes known. 

UrbanCode is specifically designed as a deployment tool and dominates because of its efficiencies. The user interface has built-in functionality for creating multiple environments, creating approval processes, and downloading artifacts. Conversely, to perform these same functions in the solution you must script the configuration file. 

Java includes Deployment Managers and agent pools for deploying to a Target Server. The solution might not be good for deployments because there isn't enough flexibility to create them quickly. We can script, but it is easier to click buttons for deployment functionality. 

I recommend the solution and rate it a seven out of ten. 

We have our CI/CD pipelines set up in GitLab. It is our code base. 

The solution makes the CI/CD pipelines easy to execute. 

The tool should include a feature that helps to edit the code directly. 

I have been using the product for two years. 

The solution is stable. 

I haven't reached out to them yet. 

GitLab's deployment is easy. 

GitLab is cheap. 

Our primary use case is for source code maintenance, then doing the build and running code coverage tools like SonarQube, and then deployment.

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. 

We have only seen a couple of times on Gitlab, which we use for building some of the applications. Recently, we have heard that some of the builds were taking a long time or were not scheduled. In such cases, they had to contact the GitLab community or the GitLab organization to address these issues.  

So, there is room for improvement in regard to the issues with build times. 

In future releases, additional features could be added in post-deployment monitoring. Currently, GitLab supports CI/CD up to deployment. Anything that would assist in monitoring deployments, especially in the context of Kubernetes or Docker, would be valuable. It may not be necessary for enterprise-level use, but for midrange organizations, integrating post-deployment monitoring of infrastructures and generating reports could be beneficial.

We have been using this solution for three years now. 

The solution offers good stability. However, sometimes we do see some issues due to upgrades and patches. But a couple of times, we have seen build issues where it takes a long time, or it gets stuck, and people have to manually restart those.

It is a scalable solution in our environment. We have over a thousand end users. 

The support is very good. 

Positive

Earlier, we were using Atlassian products, and then we shifted to GitLab.

The deployment is handled by a different team. For maintenance, we get good support from GitLab. For any production issues, we hear that we get good support from GitLab. That is something good.  

My advice would be it's a very good tool for developers, especially those spread across the globe. It has a very good interface for any pull request or code review. The CI/CD pipeline is also easily built in, so we can easily build and deploy it into various environments. So that eases the developer's and the production ops team's life.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

My primary use case is for creating pipelines and automation workflows.

By streamlining tasks that we used to do on a daily basis and scheduling them.

CI/CD, GitLab scanning, and the cloud are the most valuable features. 

There is room for improvement in GitLab Agents. 

I would like to see more features focused on GitLab or CICD. I am not sure if  there is a roadmap for GitLab CI/CD Elite.

I have been using GitLab for five years. I am currently using version 14.5.

It is a stable solution. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability of GitLab a three out of ten. It is low. 

It can be challenging to scale. Sharing databases and removing multiple VPNs is not easy to handle. GitLab's stability is not as good as other platforms that offer Kubernetes engines. We use OEMs instead.

There are 300 to 400 users in my company. We definitely plan to increase the usage. 

We are familiar with GitHub. 

I'll give the initial setup a six, slightly above average, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

Now we automate everything, so let's say the deployment now takes about one hour to deploy.

For the deployment process, we create a template and prepare the VM on our cloud. Then we deploy the container using the controller, which deploys the solution.

We had IT specialists and engineers for the deployment process. 

It's a bit tricky because we have a different license. I rate the pricing mode a five out of ten for now, but it might change in the future. We have an educational license, and support is not included.

GitLab offers various services, and it's important to understand which ones you truly need. Service providers might have different capabilities, and compatibility with your existing devices can be a critical issue. We haven't faced many problems with network compatibility or duplicated services so far. 

If I could go back in time, I would recommend using GitLab primarily as a reliable repository. For additional features like scanning and monitoring, it might be beneficial to explore other specialized solutions.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We are using GitLab for team collaboration, code management, and certain CICD pipelines.

The most valuable features of GitLab are the CI/CD pipeline and code management.

Merge conflicts and repository maintenance could improve. If there is someone new to the system they would not know if there is a conflict.

In a feature release, it would be helpful if there was AI integrated into the system. For example, if there was a CI/CD pipeline available, we could configure them for our purpose without doing the process manually.

I have been using GitLab for approximately four years.

I rate the stability of GitLab a seven out of ten.

I rate the scalability setup of GitLab a seven out of ten.

I have experience using GitHub, but GitLab is a superior platform. One major advantage of GitLab is the ability to maintain a private cloud with a wide range of features. It also allows for quick setup of CI/CD pipelines. Garrett is becoming popular amongst developers for code maintenance.

The initial setup of GitLab takes a long time because there is a lot to configure.

I rate the initial setup of GitLab a seven out of ten.

I rate GitLab a seven out of ten.

We are using the product for configuration management and source course management. For some projects, we are using it issue management.

Configuration and source management are the most valuable aspects of the solution.

It offers an easy initial setup. 

The solution is stable.

I find the product scalable. 

It's not overly expensive. 

We'd always like to see better pricing on the product. If they could make the cost lower, that would be ideal for users. 

We've been using the solution for five or six years. 

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

It is scalable and easy to expand. 

We have about 100 users on the solution. That includes developers and testers. 

Our team is getting better. We'll likely need 30 more licenses. Therefore, we plan to expand usage.

We don't need technical support. Our IT team has handled all the issues and therefore we don't need any additional support.

We did previously use a different solution. I can't recall the name.

The solution is very straightforward to set up. It's not very complex at all. My understanding is it quite easy to implement. However, I was not completely involved. 

We pay a yearly licensing fee. The pricing is pretty low. It's not too expensive. 

We did not evaluate other solutions. We've always used GitLab.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. 

I'd rate this product nine out of ten.

In some of the projects we are involved with, we use GitLab for the purposes of issue management and as a configuration management tool. Along with GitLab, we also use the core Jira software for issue management functionality, as well as GitLab Runner for its CI/CD tools.

Our internet connection runs on a different infrastructure to the greater internet system, so we are using on-premises versions of all these solutions. Because nothing is cloud-based, we don't need much in the way of firewall or security solutions.

The most important features of GitLab for us are issue management and all the CI/CD tools. Another aspect that I love about GitLab is the UI.

For as long as I have used GitLab, I haven't encountered any major limitations. However, I think that perhaps the search functionality could be better.

The main shortcoming is that with some parts of GitLab, things can get quite complex. Especially in the beginning, the learning curve can be a bit steep and it takes some time to learn how to use the tools. That said, once you understand the mentality of it, it becomes easy.

We have been using GitLab for about five years.

We have had no instability issues with GitLab. When it comes to maintenance, we have IT departments that deal with that, and I am not directly involved in the maintenance of the tools themselves so I don't know if it's difficult to maintain or not.

We haven't yet tried to scale it past the 100 or so users in my organization.

We haven't used any other similar solution before GitLab.

In some areas, the initial stages of using GitLab can be complex and presents a steep learning curve. It takes some time to learn and use all the tools properly, but once you understand the mentality behind it, it is not that difficult.

We didn't implement GitLab ourselves as we have IT departments that take care of that process. I am unsure as to whether they used any external consultants or deployed it themselves, however.

In total, I believe we have more than 300 licenses spread over about 100 users, though I can't comment on the costs involved.

GitLab is a wholly complete solution and it is for this reason that I can recommend it to other users.

I would rate GitLab a nine out of ten.