GitLab Reviews

We are providing solutions for consumer electronics. We have a repository of our code between the device team, mobile applications team, and cloud team.

It is very useful for code reviews and merging operations. Review analytics is available to users with reporter access and displays a table of open merge requests. Many merge requests can be added to the train. Each merge request runs its own merged results pipeline, which includes the changes from all of the other merge requests. If the pipeline for a merge request fails, the breaking changes are not merged, and the target branch is unaffected. It is very useful for merging our code and tracking another branch before giving release. Its interface is straightforward to see all process.

It can be free for commercial use of project management and code integrity features.

I have been using git solutions for almost two years. We are new for GitLab.

It is stable.

We are a small team. Almost 60 people are working on the same repo. It works for us currently, and we don't need to scale it.

For any technical issues, we have our infrastructure team. They have some experience with this product. Currently, we don't create any tickets for technical operations.

We were using Subversion. GitLab is a little bit more complex than Subversion, but it is okay for me.

It is easy.

We have an IT department for infrastructure operations, and they are managing this solution for us.

It seems reasonable. Our IT team manages the licenses.

I would advise others to follow best practices because they are useful for each case. If you have a problem, it can be easily solved by other people if you follow the best practices.

I would rate GitLab a nine out of ten.

We have a normal use case to build source code and our agenda and then try to deploy it. The deployment is not specifically automated, it is semi-automated. So it is normal. We create an artifact, try to build it, and then deploy it onto the application server. It's not fully automated. 

At this point, I think the features are declining. 

We like that we can create branches and then the branches can be reviewed and you can mesh those branches back. You can independently work with your own branch, you don't need to really control the core of other people. 

There could be more features in GitLab, but we are as of now not using the full-fledged feature set. 

Another good feature is the code review, which also helps us with peer review. It helps in giving part of the code and giving back whatever the branch that the developer is working on. It can then be merged once it is thoroughly reviewed. Those are certain things that I think are helpful from a developer's point of view. It provides or mandates quantitative code into the master.

We do reviews as I also work with some of the leadership teams. Leadership teams generally focus on statistics, metrics, or some sort of dashboard. They would like to have the ability to categorize these things. They would like to have a very high-level view. That would help. Someone who is not really a developer, but a leadership team. They are always interested in statistics or metrics features. That is something I would see imbedded into GitLab. That would help someone who is from the outside take a view and understand how qualitative the code is, because they cannot definitely dive in and look at the code, and they will not be able to understand all the details. At a high level, if they want to see and understand, at least they will have some confidence about how the projects are going on.

I have been using GitLab for two years. 

The stability is good. I never had any issues. Stability-wise, I'm comfortable with it. 

Scalability-wise it is very scalable as well. Based on the code volume, there is a scope for improvement. I never had issues with scalability.

Technical support depends on licensing. We haven't reached out that frequently because it is stable and we don't see any issues. I don't recall anything that we had any particular challenge that we had to reach out immediately to GitLab and then get the answer quicker at any point in time.

I wasn't here for the deployment but the deployment takes around 10 minutes. 

Only a few aspects will take close to five minutes. 

I would rate GitLab an eight out of ten. 

GitLab provides some sort of static analysis part. That is what I understand, but I never tried it. I would like to see static analysis also embedded in GitLab. That would also help us. If there's something that it does internally by GitLab and then that is already tied up with your pipeline and then it can tell you that you're coding is good or your code is not great. Based on that, it would pass or fail. That should be streamlined. I would think that would help to a greater extent, in terms of having one solution rather than depending on multiple vendors.

I am using GitLab for code management, such as code cloning, and code-to-data.

The most valuable feature of GitLab is its convenience. I am able to trace back most of my changes up to a far distance in time and it helps me to analyze and see the older version of the code.

The user interface could be more user-friendly. We do most of our operations through the website interface but it could be better.

I have been using GitLab for approximately three years.

I rate the stability of GitLab an eight out of ten.

I rate the scalability of GitLab an eight out of ten.

We have more than 1,000 developer users using this solution in my organization.

We have an internal administrator if we need help with the solution, I have not contacted GitLab for support.

I have used previously CVS. Both CVS and GitLab have their advantages and disadvantages. GitLab is in the cloud and can be accessed anywhere which is very flexible. For the functionality, I am not certain about the differences. I find them both to be good solutions.

I would recommend this solution to others that are doing code management.

I rate GitLab a seven out of ten.

We use Gitlab for CICD work. 

Git hosting has an integration with ACD which is why we liked this solution in the first place.

This solution could be improved by adding modifications such as slack notifications.

I have been using this solution for four years.

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution although the CICD may be tricky to scale. 

I have previously used Bit Bucket and Github. Bit Bucket has some issues in our country. At the time we had banning issues within our government and only GitLab was. Bit Bucket is too slow and we had to wait for five minutes just to enter the platform. 

Bit Bucket pipelines are not that easy to consider and it was harder to use than GitLab. Gitlab is also more customizable. GitHub is more expensive than GitLab and didn't offer CICD. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. 

Because GitLab uses an education license for cloud, there is unlimited storage for each account, so it's very useful. It is very flexible and easy because you can store data on cloud.

GitLab should include more features because, during the pandemic, companies like Google introduced more features. The integration and storage capabilities could be better. This would be very handy for educators and students.

We used this solution at my previous company for a few years. They initially deployed it on-premises but fully migrated to cloud because all the data was not fully backed. We had around 500 clients and 500 accounts.

It is 100% stable.

I believe it's scalable. It is suitable, and there was no need for exploration.

We used a lot of technical support for standard settings.

It is subjective. I cannot compare GitLab with Azure because it is based on experience.

We had to read the manuals first before we could set up. The manuals are helpful for consultants as we needed their expertise to complete the setup. In addition, they can ensure there is no downtime.

It has a very good price and is good for general sidetracking.

I rate this solution a ten out of ten.

I use GitLab to bring code from repositories.

GitLab's best feature is Actions.

GitLab would be improved with the addition of templates for deployment on local PCs.

I've been using GitLab since 2019.

GitLab is stable, I would rate its stability nine out of ten.

Previously we used Team Foundation Server, but GitLab is better for local cloud deployment.

The initial setup was simple.

GitLab is highly priced for smaller teams, but it's okay if considering a user base of thousands.

I would give GitLab a rating of nine out of ten.

We primarily use this solution for end-to-end CI/CD solutioning and deployment as well as infrastructure, architect and environmental management. In addition, we plan to use it for version control and SaaS solutioning and have heard it is great.

The SaaS setup is impressive, and it has DAST solutioning. It also has dependency check and scanning mechanisms. If we were using other solutions, they would have to be configured, and we would have to set them us as a third party, but GitLab is straightforward. GitLab is a single solution that helps us do everything we need.

The documentation in GitLab could be improved a bit. For example, their RBAC is role-based access, which is fine but not very good. It could also be improved a lot.

We have been using this solution for almost seven years. We are currently using version 15.2.1. We are using GitLab Cloud, and it is a public setup.

It is a stable solution, and we have not experienced any challenges.

It is scalable, but we need to pay extra costs.

The technical support is good, but it is available with paid solutions only. So we have to rely on their documentation or wait for community updates for the free tier or vendor solution.

It is a cloud solution, so we didn't have to do much. We just needed to create an account, and the solution was ready. It is gitlab.com.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten because it is a good tool.

GitLab is a platform that facilitates hosting, collaboration and version control. We also make use of its pipeline capabilities. 

It is a speedy platform compared to the others I have used. I have also enjoyed using the platform as this solution offers a good user experience. 

We are currently using Atlasian Bitbucket, Jira and Confluence. Atlassian offers more products than GitLab. GitLab offers source control management, version control and collaboration between developers. Atlassian offers features on top of this as well as more integration points for developers.

I have used Gitlab for two months. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

The configuration of Gitlab is straightforward. There is no site deployment of GitLab needed on behalf of the end user, especially if they are using the cloud version. 

GitLab's pricing is good compared to others on the market. 

If we compare the GitLab repositories to GitHub, GitHub has many issues since being acquired by Microsoft. GitLab is more independent and offers a better user experience compared to GitHub. Gitlab is easy to manage and is a good example of the Git-based collaboration tools.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.