GitLab Reviews

GitLab is for professional teams, and it has some abilities in the user interface that are interesting to me. 

The look of the user interface is good. I have seen many features here that I don't see in BitBucket.

We like the automatic deployment for different environments. For example, if you want to deploy your application for the Azure system, Azure Cloud, you have the default configuration for them. That's true for Amazon or a VM, for example, as well. 

They provide default templates for products.

It is an easy setup.

The solution is stable.

It scales well.

I have a free version. It is open-source.

Authentication can be a problem when you have an application and you want to configure it with them. I used Spring Cloud config and to connect that to GitLab was so hard. It took hours for me to configure that.

I've been using the solution for two years. 

The product is perfectly stable. There aren't bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable. It easily expands. 

I have two projects. In my personal experience, for my own project, it's a scalable system for e-commerce mobile microservice spaces for event-driven e-commerce systems that are using GitLab.

I've never requested the assistance of technical support.

I'm also familiar with Bitbucket, although I don't use it right now. 

The solution is quite simple to set up. 

I'm actually proficient. I'm not sure if a beginner user would have issues. It's likely okay for them.

The only difficult part may be the authentication configuration. It's a specific thing and not very common. 

I didn't use an integrator. It is easily deployed in-house. 

I don't need a license. I use the free version, and that is perfectly fine for me. 

I always use the latest version of GitLab. I don't check the version number.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I'd rate it a ten out of ten. I'm happy with its capabilities. 

We use it for version control and CI/CD.

CI/CD is very good. The version control system is also good. These are the two features that we use.

Its security features are very expensive. The Ultimate version is very expensive.

I would like more Agile features in the Premium version. The Premium version should have all Agile features that exist in the Ultimate version. IBM AOM has a complete Agile implementation, but in GitLab, you only have these features if you buy the Ultimate version. It would be good if we can use these in the Premium version.

I have been using GitLab for five years.

It is very stable. In five years, we had to fix it only once.

It is very scalable. We have about 2,000 users, but as per the reference architecture documentation, it can be scaled up to 50,000 users.

We are using the open-source free version. So, we don't have support. We are looking to buy the intermediate version or Premium version. 

It was very easy to set up. 

We set it up by ourselves. We also update it, and we don't have to turn it off.

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

We are evaluating its Premium version, and we are also evaluating other products like GitHub.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.

We are using it for pipelines, continuous integration, and continuous deployment. 

In terms of deployment, it can be a cloud solution, but we have installed it on our site on Azure.

GitLab is very useful for pipelines, continuous integration, and continuous deployment. It is also stable.

Its price should be improved. It is very expensive.

Based on what I know so far, its integration with Kubernetes is not so good. We have to develop many things to make it work. We have to acquire third-party components to work with Kubernetes. 

From the DevOps perspective, the way we deploy applications is too complicated. It needs to be simplified. It is very development-oriented, and it works very well for DevOps, but when you are at the group level, you want it to be simple and more oriented towards the process. The automation process to deploy is not a very good part of GitLab.

I have been using this solution for three or four years.

It is stable.

Its scalability is fine. We have 200 developers in our organization. 

We have been doing okay on our own. We are able to find support inside our company.

Its initial setup is okay. We did the installation in three months, but it was very slow and complicated to develop the continuous deployment during these three years for each application. We had to develop pipelines for multiple development languages.

We are quite well organized now, but it took a long time to think about which pipeline to use with GitLab. We now have five pipelines. We have the infrastructure pipeline, the middleware pipeline, the image pipeline, the security pipeline, and the application pipeline.

We have a team of 10 people for its deployment. They are admins and managers.

It is very expensive. We can't bear it now, and we have to find another solution.

We have a yearly subscription in which we can increase the number of licenses, but we have to pay at the end of the year. 

We are using the Azure Cloud solution, and we are thinking of trying the Azure DevOps solution this year. 

I would recommend this solution to others. The product is fine, but you have to do the integration with different pipelines.

I would rate GitLab a seven out of 10.

My company's programmers use GitLab for everyday development purposes.

The solution's most valuable feature is that it is compatible with GitHub. The product's integration capabilities are sufficient for our small company of 35 people.

Some of the programmers in my company have had complaints about the product.

We do face issues in our company when we run out of disk space. We had to do some low-level system interventions to recover the server from GitLab in our company. It would be good if GitLab implemented some diagnostic features so that the server prevents functioning when it detects insufficient disk space. It is important to prevent cache to avoid running out of disk space. Considering the aforementioned details, making a recovery wasn’t simple.

I have experience with GitLab.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Owing to the small size of my company, we do not need to utilize the scalability feature of the product.

My company has around 20 users of the product.

The initial setup of GitLab was okay.

The setup phase was completed in a day.

Our company has DevOps and CI/CD to help us with the deployment process of the product.

Though I am unsure, I feel that the solution is deployed on-premises.

The deployment phase was carried out with the in-house members of our company.

Speaking about the pricing of the solution, my company uses GitLab Community Edition.

Before choosing GitLab, my company had considered Microsoft TFS during the evaluation phase.

GitLab is a product managed by the department of programmers in our company, and I am not much involved in it.

I recommend the solution to those planning to use it.

I rate the overall product a ten out of ten.

It is used for saving source code, and then people get the source code out of it, make a branch, and merge it to make a big file for deployment. So it's mainly a source code deployment tool.

GitLab is very well-organized and easy to use. Also, it offers most features that customers need. So I think it's one of the best solutions compared to other options. So, it's the most capable and easiest tool.

In terms of the solution's interface and features, I am satisfied.

As a partner, sometimes it's difficult to get support. They have a really complicated procedure for their support. Apart from the aforementioned reason, I am very satisfied with the product. It is only after we are registered that we get proper support from GitLab. The registration itself it's quite complicated, and it is mainly because they want to make sure that the users with a license contact the right support team.

I have been using GitLab for two years. My company has a partnership with GitLab. I am using GitLab Version 15.6.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten. Since it is software, they can have some bug-related issues, and no software is 100% protected. GitLab has many features in different areas, so I cannot specify which specific area has a problem.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten. My clients who use the solution are medium-sized businesses.

The solution's technical support is good. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten. Only the initial registration is complicated.

Positive

The solution's initial setup process was easy. I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten. The solution can be deployed in a day. Only one engineer is required to deploy the solution. Also, the solution does require maintenance. Using it as a different storage operation when it comes to maintenance, there can probably be some updates that can fix security patches and other issues. So, we have several employees working on many different solutions and projects. But only one person is actually required for its maintenance.

Price-wise, it is a reasonable solution. On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing a five out of ten.

It's a great solution. So I would recommend it to those who want to use it. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

Our primary use case is for source management.

I have found the most valuable feature is security control. I also like the branching and cloning software.

I would like to have some features to support peer review. It would be nice if I can input some comments and share them with the teams. But I am not sure if it is already included in some paid versions.

I have been working with GitLab now for the past three or four years now.

The stability of the current solution I would rate as a nine on a scale of one to ten.

The scalability on a scale of one to ten is around an eight or nine. We currently have around one hundred individuals using this solution on a daily basis.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We are currently using the open-source version.

I would recommend using GitLab and rank it a seven out of ten.

For us, Gitlab's most valuable feature is the integration with Cypress. We're using Cypress as an automation tool, so we're using GitLab as a tool for running in parallel.

I'm new to GitLab, so I would appreciate more documentation about the code and commands.

I have been using GitLab for almost a year now.

I rate GitLab nine out of 10 for stability.

I rate GitLab eight out of 10 for scalability. We have around 40 people using it.

Setting up GitLab is straightforward. 

I believe we are using the free version of GitLab. 

I rate GitLab a solid nine out of 10. I recommend GitLab. Based on what I've heard, I think GitLab is will be the permanent tool we'll use. I don't think that we're going to look for any other tool in the near future.

Our company uses the solution to manage code, Wiki, and repository management for multiple projects on Truck It In. The solution helps us manage our experience with projects. We currently have twenty-two developers using the solution.  

We are in the process of executing the pipelines to use the solution for CI/CD. 

The interface is much more user friendly than competitor products. 

The merge request tool is very valuable. 

It is easy to perform code and peer reviews. 

Key features allow creation of well-presented Wiki that includes ideas, development, and domains. 

The solution should expand features to match other tools such as Coverity, Veracode, or SonarQube with its static code analysis tool so third-party integrations are not required.

There can be a lapse of fifteen minutes to a day when updates are pushed. We do receive email notification of upcoming lapses and push progress, so that helps.

I have been using the solution for eight months. 

The solution is stable with no failures or issues in the version controlling or epic creation processes. 

The solution is scalable. We can manage issues or epics, make Kanban with proper backlog, and move any processes with no problems. It is scalable in terms of managing our experience and using it as a project management tool. 

We have not needed technical support. 

The setup is straightforward with good user interface. Third-party integrations can be a bit of a hassle. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

We use Spring Boot at the back end with IntelliJ for IDs. IntelliJ is a good tool that integrates our projects with the solution through a well-managed synchronization process. 

The solution has a better user interface than GitHub and Bitbucket. 

We also use ClickUp which is a great tool for managing tickets and stream planning. We follow Agile methodologies so ClickUp is quite helpful to us. 

SonarQube has a new integration with the solution so we use its static code analysis tool.

The solution is valuable for developers because it includes version controlling, pipelines, CI/CD, and integrations. When moving from the development side to the production side it is important to ensure that code is bug-free with no errors. We have less issues on the production side because we take full advantage of the solution. 

The solution currently requires third-party integrations for CI/CD so I rate it a seven out of ten.