GitLab Reviews

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.

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.

I primarily use it for verifying some things. We're using it as a repository. It's used for software code. 

I didn't have an option when coming to this solution. It was imposed on me. That said, I've had no problems so far. 

The solution is stable.

The scalability is good.

My understanding is that the setup is straightforward. 

I'm not sure of the complete capabilities of the tool as I don't use it that much. Perhaps the integration could be better. 

I've used the solution for one year, however, not so regularly.

I have not heard of any stability complaints. My understanding is that the product is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It won't crash or freeze. 

We have about 100 people using the solution in our organization. 

For our purposes, we find the solution scales well. It's okay. We've never had any issues. 

We previously used IBM CLM and RTC.

I did not directly handle the initial setup. There is an IT team, which is responsible for all the installation and setup tasks. I'm not sure how many people were involved in the deployment and maintenance of the solution. 

Our IT team set the solution up.

I haven't looked into if we have noticed an ROI or not. 

I can't speak to the exact cost or licensing structure. I don't deal with this aspect of the product. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. I'd rate it eight 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. 

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.

Our company is a partner and installs the solution for clients who manage their ACD and DevOps pipelines. 

We have 700 developers who use the solution, Microsoft's integration, and SharePoint for uploading. 

The solution's service delivery model is fantastic. 

Integrations connect to the cloud server and are easy to use. 

The solution offers good security and stability. 

The solution should again offer an on-premises deployment option. In the past, an on-premises solution was offered that used to sync with the cloud-based solution. We would like that option to return because many industries are interested in offline uploads and pathways. 

The solution should integrate Web 3.0 and provide better system transactions.

I have been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is very stable. 

The initial setup is simple. 

You can immediately start using the solution as soon as you subscribe. 

The solution is based on a subscription model and is reasonably priced. 

Many options are available in the database but a few uncommon options that our company actually liked have been phased out. If those options return, the solution will be fantastic. 

Our company subscribes to the premium tier which includes security. It would be nice to offer security as an add-on at lower tiers so more users have access to these advanced features. 

I rate the cost an eight out of ten. 

I recommend the solution and rate it an eight out of ten. 

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.

We are using it for building mobile applications and web applications. I am supporting the code in GitLab. It is only for giving access to my development team, and I just see what merge requests are coming.

I like GitLab from the CI/CD perspective. It is much easier to set up CI/CD and then integrate with other tools.

In the free version, when a merge request is raised, there is no way to enforce certain rules. We can't enforce that this merge request must be reviewed or approved by two or three people in the team before it is pushed to the master branch. That's why we are exploring using some agents.

I have been using this solution for more than six months.

It seems stable.

I didn't find any scalability issues so far. We have around 50 members who use this solution. Around 20 of them use it on a daily basis.

One of my colleagues got in touch with them, and his response was that their technical support was not that great. The details that they provided for the question were not that great.

We also use GitHub. Earlier GitLab was more favored, but now GitHub has everything that is there in GitLab. If GitHub is offering more, then there might be chances of switching to that. I am not attached to either of these solutions. If things are working better for me in GitHub, I will move to GitHub.

It is simple. You just create one repo and then give access. It takes maybe 5 to 10 minutes.

Its price is fine. It is on the cheaper side and not expensive. You have to pay additionally for GitLab CI/CD minutes.

Initially, we used the free version. When we ran out of GitLab minutes, we migrated to the paid version.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate GitLab an eight out of ten.