GitLab Reviews

Most of the features are pretty good.

The code merging capability is something that we use very frequently. Merging code is a big factor for us because most of our teams use GitLab.

The integration could be slightly better.

The interface should be more user-friendly.

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

It is a stable product. We have not had any issues with respect to instability.

With approximately 30 users, we are not a large company. I found the scalability to be okay but I haven't tested it extensively.

We have experience with GitLab support and we found the service to be good. There is not much of a lag in terms of addressing queries.

I would rate the support a five out of five.

Positive

I also use GitHub and I am more comfortable with GitLab.

The initial setup is simple.

This product is not very expensive but the price can be better. As such, I would rate GitLab a four out of five in terms of pricing.

Overall, this is a good product that has a lot of features. There are several features that I don't use personally but other members of my team do.

I would rate this solution a nine 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. 

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.

I am using GitLab for many purposes, such as CI/CD.

I have found the most valuable features of GitLab are the GitClone, GitPush, GitPull, GitMatch, GitMit, GitCommit, and GitStatus.

GitLab could improve by having more plugins and better user-friendliness.

I have been using GitLab for four years.

GitLab is a stable solution based on version control.

The scalability of GitLab is good. We can have multiple Amazon AWS enrollments.

We have approximately eight people using this solution in my company.

We use the support when we are doing integration. We have a blog where we can open a ticket and receive support.

The initial setup of GitLab is easy. If there is a server the implementation will take 30 minutes to one hour. In the case, there is no server, then we can install the Docker box with the related supporting office installation. This will take approximately two hours.

This is an open-source solution.

We are using this solution because of our client's requirements.

I would advise others to prepare the documentation for their team members.

I rate GitLab a nine 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.

We were working on our pipeline infrastructure running GitLab and we needed some scripts, such as Terraform, to complete some operations.

I have found the solution has good performance.

The solution could improve by having better integration.

I have been using GitLab for a couple of weeks.

The solution is stable.

The stability of the solution has been good.

I was satisfied with the support.

There is a license required for this solution.

I have evaluated Slack.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate GitLab a seven out of ten.

My daily usage involves fetching code, creating branches, modifying the code, and then committing my changes. Once I'm ready for a review with my colleagues, I create a merge request. Then, during a code review, they will use the interface to write comments. Once everything in the comments has been addressed, I complete the merge. This describes a typical scenario.

We develop under Linux.

Everybody needs a source code versioning assistant, and GitLab is very flexible in this regard. 

GitLab offers a good interface for doing code reviews between two colleagues.

The continuous integration feature is good.

We are having a few problems integrating with Jira at the moment, which is something that our IT department is investigating. In general, integrating with third-party tools is easy for some but difficult for others. When I create a new project, I go through all of the settings, and then I can integrate that with other tools. However, with Jira, I have problems.

If we could have GitLab execute some of the system tests then it would be good because as it is now, we have to rely on another tool. Ideally, it would execute a system test, a unit test, and then create a report. It is possible to do it but requires a lot of scripting expertise. 

It should be easily available on their menu, similar to adding tests, configuring the tests you want to execute when you launch a build, so the build would be done then tests would be performed, and the report would be created.

This would allow us to know what went wrong during our systems test. If this aspect was more integrated into their interface, instead of relying on developers to script everything, it would be easier.

I would like to see better integration with third-party software.

I have been using GitLab for a bit more than a year.

GitLab is pretty stable. I would rate it an eight out of ten.

I haven't really used it outside of our Linux development environment, so I cannot really tell.

GitLab is not responding quickly enough to our request. I know one of the problems that I am experiencing is with the integration with Jira.

We submitted the request to GitLab and we did not receive any replies. That was back in October.

Technical support could be better and their response time needs improvement to respond more quickly.

Since I am using the web-based version and accessing GitLab through the web, I didn't have to install Gitlab, so in that sense, there was no effort, obstacles, or challenges in the initial setup.

I needed to understand the menu.

When I create a new software project in GitLab, I need to go through all of the settings to configure everything, which was not a problem. I needed to understand all of the options, and what it was doing.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Overall, our team is happy with the solution.

The CI/CD pipeline management is the solution's most valuable aspect.

Everything is easy to configure and easy to work with. Our team finds it to be very user-friendly.

Generally, the volume control is very good.

I've looked at GitLab's roadmap. The only thing our company is really waiting on in terms of features is the development of metrics. We're looking forward to being able to take advantage of them.

We've been using the solution for two years at this point.

We've never had any issues with stability. We're very happy with the setup we have and it works well for our team. We haven't had any issues with the product crashing or freezing and I don't recall dealing with bugs or glitches.

The solution is very scalable. I'm not sure how many nodes we have currently, however, it is scalable. If we need the extra capacity, I know we can build it out and use different setups.

We have about 100 users in our company using the product.

We've never needed to contact GitLab for technical support. I can't speak to the level of service their in-house team might give.

We previously used SVN. We migrated everything over to GitLab.

Our platform engineering team found the initial implementation pretty straightforward.

Within the organization, deployment took about a week. That said, we had to spend three weeks migrating from SVN, which is what we were using before.

There isn't really any maintenance required. It's not something we think about or worry about, really.

We're just a customer. We don't have a professional relationship with GitLab.

We're using the latest version of the solution right now.

I would definitely recommend the solution to other organizations. It's pretty easy to use and can scale if you need to. It's stable as well. We're not really missing any features. It's great.

Overall, I'd rate GitLab nine out of ten. They can always improve, which is why I didn't give them a perfect score. What they are working on, based on their roadmap, is already quite impressive. We're looking forward to metrics coming down the pipeline later in the year.