GitLab Reviews

During the development environment, we have a different number of developers, close to five. So each of them will have a different project. Maybe some of them do it in one project, but their assignment or the activity they are doing may be different, so they will do their activity and then they will push it to the GitLab. If there is an amendment or update required, they will pull it from GitLab and if they do their activity again, they will push it. 

GitLab also does the merging . The merging feature makes it easy later on for the deployment.

I would like to see security increased in the future. A secure environment is very important.

I have been using GitLab for the past seven years.

The cloud provides good stability for GitLab.

GitLab is scalable. I think they have their own actually premium services. So, there are some functionalities and features that may be added on top of the free version.

The initial setup of GitLab is easy and straightforward. You do not need to be a deployment expert. It can be done by the managers or directors. 

GitLab can be done in-house but we are using CloudWatch. All you need is to have a free account.

The initial setup cost is excellent and you can add the premium features later.

Using GitLab is important to help provide a more secure and reliable environment for developers working with information in the cloud. GitLab brings a level of safety. I would rate GitLab a ten out of ten.

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. 

The most valuable functionality of GitLab, for me, is the DevOps. Besides the normal source control based on Git, I find the Auto DevOps features most important in the solution.

As GitLab is not perfect, what needs improvement in the solution is the Wiki feature of the groups or the repertories because currently, it's not searchable by default. You'll need an indexing service such as Elasticsearch to make it searchable, and that requires too much work, so for me, it's the main feature that should be improved in GitLab.

In the next version of the solution, from the top of my head, the documentation could be improved. Besides the Wiki, it would be good if there's documentation that would be automatically generated based on the code repository. In other words, there should be some tutorials from GitLab for developers in the next release.

I've been using GitLab for almost three years.

GitLab is a pretty stable solution, and on a scale of one to ten, with one being the worst and ten being the best, I'm rating its stability a ten. My team just learned some details about the configuration of GitLab, so it's now tuned up, and right now, there's no problem with the stability of the platform.

In terms of GitLab scalability, based on its features, it's supposed to scale easily enough geographically, but my company hasn't tried scaling it yet. It shouldn't be a big problem to scale the solution.

In terms of the technical support for GitLab, I mainly use the forums and support sites of the solution. I don't use the direct technical support line of GitLab.

The initial setup for GitLab is simple mainly because of all its features that allow you to make a startup instance of the solution simpler and quicker, and that's very good.

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.

We evaluated Azure DevOps, but we liked the style of how things are built up inside GitLab for the end-user and the developer more compared to Azure DevOps, though Azure DevOps is also a very good choice.

I'm using the latest version of GitLab.

My company has a small team and only has six users of GitLab.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is the worst and ten is the best, my rating for GitLab, in general, is nine. My company likes the solution very much, especially over Azure DevOps.

I would recommend GitLab for others to use.

My company is a customer of GitLab.

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.

We are using GitLab for code management. We put code onto their servers. This allows developers to have a centralized place for code collaboration.

GitLab has helped our company save time. In our current project, we have split the job into two parts, one team is working on one particular feature and when done the solution merges the code together. Every two weeks we can release a new APK. We have the latest code in development so we don't need to merge code manually.

The solution receives frequent updates, it is always improving.

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

I have been using GitLab for approximately seven years.

GitLab is highly stable.

The scalability of GitLab is good.

All developers are using GitLab in my company.

I plan to increase the usage of the solution in the future.

I rate the support from GitLab a four out of five.

Positive

I have previously used Bitbucket and Filezilla.

The initial setup of GitLab is easy.

There are different licensing options available, including a free limited-user license.

We evaluated other options before choosing GitLab.

One person can do the maintenance of the solution.

My advice to others is for them to use GitLab for managing their code.

I rate GitLab a nine out of ten.

I've used the solution just for my learning purposes. My company is using currently GitLab. We are using it for our CI/CD purposes for continuous integration and continuous deployment.

To my knowledge, my company started to use it as there were no decent alternatives to GitLab when they started to use it. The only decent alternative was GitHub, however, it was lacking in the CI/CD pipeline capabilities. At that time there were no GitHub actions available at the moment.

Of all available products, it was the easiest to use and easy to install.

The solution should be more cloud-native and have more cloud-native capabilities and features. It should be more GitOps-ready.

I started using the solution a year ago. My company has used it for four years.

I cannot speak to how stable the solution is. From what I have seen so far, there were no serious issues with GitLab.

Approximately four to five developers and maybe a couple of QA testers and a couple of DevOps engineers are responsible exclusively for GitLab maintenance and support.

Technical support has mostly been good.

Positive

I tried to learn a little bit about Jenkins, however, it was only through some internet content.

At the moment of the GitLab acquisition, I was not working for the company. I did not handle the implementation process.

We need at least a couple of technicians, engineers, for deployment and maintenance. 

Our own technical team handled the deployment. 

When I was hired (in 2020) they told me that they were using an open-source version. I'm not sure if that's still the case as it's a quite big company. Nowadays they should be using some kind of paid version, as the demand is pretty high, as far as I know.

I'm not sure of the exact licensing costs. 

We are customers and end-users.

As far as I know, we are using the on-premise version. There are two versions of GitLab - the on-premise and the cloud version. We are using on-premise. As far as I know, we also keep making sure it's up-to-date.

I'd rate the solution 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.

The solution's most valuable features are pipelines. GitLab allows you to automate things and show them diagrammatically.

The solution is much harder to get around and organize extra features. It has fewer options, and its UI is not so user-friendly.

I have been using GitLab for one year.

GitLab is a very stable solution.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven out of ten.

Although the solution's documentation is publicly available, you have to invest much more time to read everything and understand how to get around.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is very easy and ten is difficult, I rate the solution's initial setup a six to seven out of ten.

The solution's pricing is acceptable.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten.

I got familiar with the CI part of the tool. If you want to use all the features for testing and packaging, you have to use the paid version.

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