AWS CodeBuild vs GitLab comparison

"The integration is a good feature."

"The integration with other AWS services has streamlined our workflow."

"The tool is used to build and test code. I find its biggest advantages are elasticity and reliability. We can easily assign as many computing resources as needed to build our code, which is much simpler than traditional methods that require server upgrades. It's a serverless tool, so it's very flexible and elastic."

"The initial setup of CodeBuild is easy."

"The solution provides good integrations."

"One of the main features I value in CodeBuild compared to previous experiences, like using Jenkins, is its ability to handle tasks automatically with AWS, requiring only proper setup of the check file."

"A valuable feature is the support for third-party repositories such as Bitbucket, GitLab, or GitHub."

"It works seamlessly with AWS Elastic Container Registry (ECR)."

"They incorporate new features every September, and they have introduced their own code editor and AI features."

"The most valuable feature of GitLab is the automatic merging of code."

"GitLab's source control is excellent."

"It scales well."

"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."

"We're only using the basic features of GitLab and haven't used any advanced features. The solution works fine, so that's what we like about GitLab. We're party using GitHub and GitLab. We have a GitHub server, while we use GitLab locally or only within our team, and it works okay. We don't have any significant problems with the solution. We also found the straightforward setup, stability, and scalability of GitLab valuable."

"The solution's most valuable features are pipelines."

"The most valuable features of GitLab are ease of use and highly intuitive UI and performance."

"There is no persistent storage or preservation of workspace between the builds."

"One of the main challenges is that if the environment is not set up properly, it will result in issues such as image errors."

"While working on building images for multiple applications within a single script, I encountered an issue where looping functionality was not supported as expected."

"Notifications could be added, or SNS integration could be included so that notifications can be received on every build, whether the build fails or succeeds."

"They can further improve the integration of the Bitbucket for CodeBuild."

"The front-end interface and the management are somewhat challenging, and there's a lot of space for improvement."

"For improvement, I'd suggest more build instance-type options. There's a big jump from 15 gigabytes of RAM to 150, and I'd like something in between as the larger option is too expensive for our needs."

"The deployment fails sometimes."

"It is a little complex to set up the pipelines within the solution."

"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 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."

"The documentation is confusing."

"The solution should be more cloud-native and have more cloud-native capabilities and features."

"We do face issues in our company when we run out of disk space."

"We would like to generate document pages from the sources."

"There are missing search features, particularly when searching repositories or applying filters. Additionally, I have encountered issues with the deployment of CI/CD pipelines, especially dealing with variable environments."

"We pay a monthly licensing fee."

"Despite the cost, it is worth the investment."

"AWS CodeBuild is free. We only pay for our code's compute resources during the build process. For example, if our code takes ten minutes to build, we only pay for those ten minutes of computing time. CodeDeploy and CodePipeline are free because they're serverless and don't require computing resources. CodeCommit has minimal costs for storing code."

"The solution's standard license is paid annually. They have changed the pricing model and it used to be better. There is a free version available."

"Regarding pricing, I would rate GitLab as moderately priced, maybe around a seven or eight out of ten. It could be more flexible for clients but generally offers good value."

"It seems reasonable. Our IT team manages the licenses."

"We are using the open-source version."

"The solution's pricing is acceptable."

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

"I think that we pay approximately $100 USD per month."

"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."