GitLab Reviews

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.

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.

My primary use case is for creating pipelines and automation workflows.

By streamlining tasks that we used to do on a daily basis and scheduling them.

CI/CD, GitLab scanning, and the cloud are the most valuable features. 

There is room for improvement in GitLab Agents. 

I would like to see more features focused on GitLab or CICD. I am not sure if  there is a roadmap for GitLab CI/CD Elite.

I have been using GitLab for five years. I am currently using version 14.5.

It is a stable solution. I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability of GitLab a three out of ten. It is low. 

It can be challenging to scale. Sharing databases and removing multiple VPNs is not easy to handle. GitLab's stability is not as good as other platforms that offer Kubernetes engines. We use OEMs instead.

There are 300 to 400 users in my company. We definitely plan to increase the usage. 

We are familiar with GitHub. 

I'll give the initial setup a six, slightly above average, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

Now we automate everything, so let's say the deployment now takes about one hour to deploy.

For the deployment process, we create a template and prepare the VM on our cloud. Then we deploy the container using the controller, which deploys the solution.

We had IT specialists and engineers for the deployment process. 

It's a bit tricky because we have a different license. I rate the pricing mode a five out of ten for now, but it might change in the future. We have an educational license, and support is not included.

GitLab offers various services, and it's important to understand which ones you truly need. Service providers might have different capabilities, and compatibility with your existing devices can be a critical issue. We haven't faced many problems with network compatibility or duplicated services so far. 

If I could go back in time, I would recommend using GitLab primarily as a reliable repository. For additional features like scanning and monitoring, it might be beneficial to explore other specialized solutions.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight 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. 

GitLab's best features are continuous integration and fast deployment.

GitLab's UI could be improved. In the next version, the documentation of the migrations steps should be better.

I've been working with GitLab for six years.

GitLab is very stable.

GitLab is scalable.

GitLab's technical support is quick and responsive.

Positive

The initial setup is pretty simple for GitLab as a service, but it's more complex for a hosted solution.

GitLab is comparatively expensive, but it provides value because it's feature-rich. I would rate its pricing four out of five.

I would rate GitLab nine 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 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.

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.