GitLab Reviews

I'm part of the application development team comprising 10-12 developers and I have used GitLab for configuration and version management. We have also used it for DevOps, but I have not been involved in the DevOps side. My work with GitLab involved basic version management (i.e. checking in, checking out, merging) and related features. 

I have also used GitLab for doing remote builds, which is when you check in and it triggers the build on the application remotely. For example, we have a YAML script that has been written for performing builds on GitLab automatically and when that script gets executed, it performs the builds and copies them to the destination folder. All of this gets triggered from GitLab.

I like that you can use GitLab as a double-sided solution for both DevOps and version management. It's a good product for working in these two areas, and the user interface makes it easy to understand.

There was a problem with the build environment when we were looking at developing iOS applications. iOS build require Mac machines and there are no Mac machines provided by GitLab in their cloud. So to build for mobile iOS application, we needed to use our own Mac machine within our own infrastructure. If GitLab were to provide a feature such that an iOS application could also be built through GitLab directly, that would be great.

I have used GitLab for two months.

It's stable. 

Once all the scripts are written, it becomes scalable. When an application gets deployed and people start using it, it's on the cloud and so it becomes scalable. All the applications that we design are deliberately written in such a way as to be scalable.

We only used GitLab for a short duration, so there was not much scope or need for contacting technical support.

The setup is straightforward to an extent because the part of GitLab that I was using for version management was similar to other tools that I have used such as Git and SVN. When I use GitLab, it's more or less the same process and workflow as these other tools, so there wasn't a big learning curve for me.

Our application was an accumulation of multiple applications, so there were multiple builds happening at any given time. GitLab would process the builds and it would take only a couple of hours for us to deploy the builds on the cloud.

The other thing is that the GitLab user interface is good, so it's easy to understand. You, yourself, can learn it simply by exploring and trying it out. Then there's a lot of help that is available on the GitLab website on how to use it. 

For the implementation, we had a DevOps engineer who was the primary technical guy, and then the others were developers and related entities performing the development.

Personally, I can't say much about the return on investment because the licensing and costs and everything have been borne by our customer. We were just using it. But I think that the return on investment must be good, and it might be one of the reasons why the customer is using it for all their projects.

I'm not aware of the licensing costs because those were covered by the customer.

I can certainly recommend GitLab. It's a good product and I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case is for source management.

I have found the most valuable feature is security control. I also like the branching and cloning software.

I would like to have some features to support peer review. It would be nice if I can input some comments and share them with the teams. But I am not sure if it is already included in some paid versions.

I have been working with GitLab now for the past three or four years now.

The stability of the current solution I would rate as a nine on a scale of one to ten.

The scalability on a scale of one to ten is around an eight or nine. We currently have around one hundred individuals using this solution on a daily basis.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We are currently using the open-source version.

I would recommend using GitLab and rank it a seven out of ten.

Our company uses the solution to manage code, Wiki, and repository management for multiple projects on Truck It In. The solution helps us manage our experience with projects. We currently have twenty-two developers using the solution.  

We are in the process of executing the pipelines to use the solution for CI/CD. 

The interface is much more user friendly than competitor products. 

The merge request tool is very valuable. 

It is easy to perform code and peer reviews. 

Key features allow creation of well-presented Wiki that includes ideas, development, and domains. 

The solution should expand features to match other tools such as Coverity, Veracode, or SonarQube with its static code analysis tool so third-party integrations are not required.

There can be a lapse of fifteen minutes to a day when updates are pushed. We do receive email notification of upcoming lapses and push progress, so that helps.

I have been using the solution for eight months. 

The solution is stable with no failures or issues in the version controlling or epic creation processes. 

The solution is scalable. We can manage issues or epics, make Kanban with proper backlog, and move any processes with no problems. It is scalable in terms of managing our experience and using it as a project management tool. 

We have not needed technical support. 

The setup is straightforward with good user interface. Third-party integrations can be a bit of a hassle. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

We use Spring Boot at the back end with IntelliJ for IDs. IntelliJ is a good tool that integrates our projects with the solution through a well-managed synchronization process. 

The solution has a better user interface than GitHub and Bitbucket. 

We also use ClickUp which is a great tool for managing tickets and stream planning. We follow Agile methodologies so ClickUp is quite helpful to us. 

SonarQube has a new integration with the solution so we use its static code analysis tool.

The solution is valuable for developers because it includes version controlling, pipelines, CI/CD, and integrations. When moving from the development side to the production side it is important to ensure that code is bug-free with no errors. We have less issues on the production side because we take full advantage of the solution. 

The solution currently requires third-party integrations for CI/CD so I rate it a seven 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.

GitLab can be deployed on-premise and in the cloud.

GitLab is mainly used as a repository.

The most valuable feature of GitLab is the ability to upload scripts and make changes when needed and then reupload them. Additionally, the solution is user-friendly.

I have not explored the solution fully but the features that I have used have been good.

GitLab can improve the integration with third-party applications. It could be made easier. Additionally, having API control from my application could be helpful.

I have been using GitLab for approximately three years.

The stability of GitLab is good.

We have approximately 20 people in my department using GitLab and in my organization, we have approximately 4,000 people using it.

I have not used the support from GitLab.

The initial setup of GitLab is complex and could improve.

GitLab is an open-source solution.

I rate GitLab a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for source code management, and also team collaboration for the application lifecycle.

It has improved the way our organization functions.

It is very easy to use.

This product is always evolving, and they listen to the customers.

It solves what the customers what.

It would be really good if they integrated more features in application security.

I would also like to see scanning for some vulnerabilities and allow people to have a one-stop glance at the state of the security application

I have been working with GitLab for more than five years.

We are always using the latest version.

It's stable, and we have not experienced any issues with bugs or glitches.

It's a scalable solution. It's easy to scale.

We have used many solutions before GitLab.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The price is okay.

My advice is to work on the processes that are in the environment. Know what you need to do and what you need to deliver the software. You have to ask the question: What do you need to deploy the software?

Always take security into account from the beginning.

While this is a good tool that is always evolving and there are new updated security standards that are being published and improved upon, it is always a good idea to have another solution to compare with to get better at using it. You can always have a combination of all of them, which would something that I would be interested in.

We are always evaluating to see if there is a solution that can do the job better.

You need to have a well-defined set of processes and that will help them adapt GitLab.

Overall, it's a great product and it does a good job.

I would rate this solution an eight 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. 

The deployment and performance of GitLab could be better. In addition, the solution could be faster.

We have been using this solution for more than five years, and it is deployed on cloud.

GitLab is stable.

It is a scalable solution.

The installation was straightforward.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten, and it is good for a small set of people.