GitLab Reviews

GitLab serves as my main DevOps platform for managing our repository and code base, as well as for pipeline integration of our system.

We maintain all our projects in GitLab with separate folders for project files, and we use GitLab to manage our projects. We also use GitLab pipeline to deploy in our dev environment, QA environment, and production, as well as for creating patches.

GitLab has positively impacted my organization by being faster than other platforms and providing the best user interface and features. Creating merge requests is easy, and it makes it simple to use for new joiners.

GitLab's best features are its built-in CI/CD and pipeline integration, which can be easily connected to AWS or other deployment platforms. The CI/CD pipeline integration is the most valuable aspect for me, and it also provides an easy user interface to create merge requests, merge, and create branches.

The CI/CD pipeline integration has helped my workflow by allowing us to use the .gitlab-ci.yml file to integrate and write our pipeline codes, where we include build jobs, test jobs, and deploy jobs directly with our AWS for S3 using CI/CD variables for push.

In GitLab pipelines, both manual and automatic integration are offered for the pipeline runner, and pipeline logs are provided, which are very useful for DevOps engineers and developers for debugging.

GitLab can be improved by being more responsive in the UI and offering better pricing for premium features, which would be useful for small startups. While GitLab's CI/CD is powerful, it is somewhat complex in certain aspects.

It would be better if the GitLab and Jira integration were more flexible and easier to integrate with Jira for task management in the future.

Since I joined my company, we have been using GitLab for our repo maintenance, so I have been using it for more than two years.

In my experience, GitLab is stable; however, sometimes it takes much time to start the runner and gets stuck in a pending situation, possibly due to traffic issues.

GitLab handles growing workloads and users well, and its scalability is good, but the downtime issue is a concern because it sometimes takes too long to start the runner.

Earlier, I did my personal projects using GitHub before I joined my current organization, which uses GitLab, and that is the reason for switching. I personally prefer GitLab over GitHub because it is user-friendly and easy to work with.

My current organization started with GitLab.

I would advise others looking into using GitLab that it is a perfect platform for organization-level repository management and pipeline CI/CD features are very useful and easy to use.

I have shared everything I feel and noted the pros and cons of GitLab as a user. Overall, I rate GitLab positively, giving it a seven out of ten because I have been using GitLab for more than two and a half years and have not faced many difficulties. However, in some cases, I got stuck with runners getting delayed to run, which can be annoying.

We use CI/CD for producing a Docker image. Afterward, we use Argo CD with Helm for deployment on OpenShift. Initially, we had the open-source version, however, we upgraded to the Ultimate version for security scanning and other features.

The CI/CD pipeline with Helm has significantly improved deployment speed and efficiency. Before using this solution, our deployments took four to five hours. Now, we can deploy applications in ten minutes. The Ultimate version offers enhanced features for security scanning through DAST and SAST analysis, which have greatly benefitted our project workflow.

The licensing model could be improved to be more accommodating in terms of user numbers and costs. This would serve more users better.

I have been working with GitLab for three years.

We use a partner, and they are very competent. We have not had the need to open a support ticket directly with GitLab.

Neutral

Before GitLab, we used Jenkins. We used GitLab as a Git repository and Jenkins for pipelines. With Jenkins, we produce Docker images and conduct tests and compile Java projects.

We have saved time significantly, reducing deployment time from four hours to five minutes per deployment.

The price is high, and it limits user accessibility. When we shifted from the open-source to the Ultimate version, we had to reduce the number of users due to the licensing model.

We did not evaluate other options as we are currently satisfied with GitLab.

I recommend GitLab for security features and rate it eight out of ten. 

However, the licensing model could be more flexible to accommodate a broader user base. I especially recommend it for public companies and government-related entities.

I am using GitLab primarily as a code repository and for CI/CD tools and deployments.

The feature I appreciate the most about GitLab is its ease of use and compatibility, which allows for straightforward building and deployment processes. 

Continuous integration with deployment is very powerful, which is a significant reason for migrating from TFS to GitLab. Its documentation is extensive, and YAML files are user-friendly, making the deployment process more or less straightforward.

There are missing search features, particularly when searching repositories or applying filters. Additionally, I have encountered issues with the deployment of CI/CD pipelines, especially dealing with variable environments. 

Creating a YAML file with numerous variables can be challenging without a way to separate them by different environments. It would be beneficial to have a user-friendly interface for setting up these configurations, instead of just writing YAML files.

I have been working with GitLab for a little over a year as I transition from TFS.

The stability of GitLab is impressive. Everything, including runners, functions smoothly without any issues.

Technical support from GitLab has been satisfactory. I have had meetings where they taught me, explained things, and provided guidance for starting from scratch. Overall, my experience has been pretty good.

Neutral

I am transitioning from TFS to GitLab, mainly due to the powerful continuous integration capabilities of GitLab.

Currently, I have two developers partially dedicated to creating the CI/CDs, Firebend, and repositories.

Migrating to GitLab is bringing time-saving benefits, and everything is easier to automate. This transition is crucial for us.

The pricing of GitLab is reasonable, aligning with what I consider to be average compared to competitors.

I am migrating from TFS to GitLab.

I would appreciate some AI-driven helpers, similar to Visual Studio's Copilot, integrated into GitLab. This could enhance the user experience by providing assistance during configuration. I rate GitLab a nine out of ten points.

We were using GitLab as a repository for our project. Whenever we were developing anything, we would commit our codes there. 

We used it for creating branches, merging branches, and comparing branches to resolve conflicts during code committing. We configured the CI/CD pipeline to automate our deployment process. We also utilized it in conjunction with tools like Octopus and OpenShift.

GitLab helped us streamline our code-committing and versioning process. It provided better user-friendly solutions for comparing and resolving conflicts when committing code. 

The CI/CD pipeline setup was straightforward and required fewer commands, making it simpler to use compared to Tekton. This efficiency in code management and deployment contributed to smoother operations in our projects.

The most valuable aspects of GitLab are the ability to create branches, merge branches, and compare branches to resolve code conflicts. 

The documentation provided by GitLab is very comprehensive, which is useful for resolving queries. GitLab's logs are also beneficial for tracking the status of our CI/CD pipeline.

GitLab can improve its user interface to make conflict resolution more user-friendly. Better and more descriptive logs during CI/CD pipeline configuration would also be beneficial to diagnose issues more quickly. 

Sometimes, the logs provided are not sufficient to understand the errors, and we needed assistance from our DevOps team.

I have been using GitLab for around four to five years.

I have not experienced any performance or stability issues with GitLab so far.

GitLab is scalable and works well with multiple environments. It integrates well with other tools. It has all the features required for our coding and deployment needs, which makes it scalable to our changing requirements.

I did not have the opportunity to engage with GitLab's technical support as I did not encounter any issues requiring escalation.

Neutral

The initial setup was straightforward. There were no challenges beyond typical configuration, and the documentation was adequate.

Our DevOps team handled most of the configuration work, and we, as developers, made changes only occasionally for personal use scenarios.

I have never paid for using GitLab personally, as it is free for our usage purposes. Even when working in other small organizations, we opted for GitLab as it was cost-efficient.

I would recommend GitLab to others because it is free and user-friendly. It provides all the necessary functionalities we need.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I use GitLab to manage our development lifecycle. We use it to store code and automate our CI/CD pipeline. Once developers commit their code, the CI/CD pipeline automatically starts, supporting development through various stages. It is part of our software development life cycle.

GitLab enhances productivity and reduces time since many tasks are automated. I appreciate the team collaboration it offers, enabling multiple people to work on the same Git repository seamlessly. 

Additionally, it streamlines our DevOps processes with automated CI/CD pipelines.

There are some challenges with repository file management as GitLab may struggle to manage larger files. Improvements could be made regarding size management and file partitioning. 

Also, the UI has remained the same for a couple of years and could benefit from an update with AI features and better customization.

I have been using GitLab for three or four years.

I have not encountered any performance or stability issues with GitLab so far. It has remained stable and reliable.

GitLab is scalable as multiple users can simultaneously access it without issues.

We have rarely needed to escalate issues to technical support since GitLab usually runs seamlessly. Occasionally, issues might arise if the URL isn't up or due to server problems.

Positive

I have worked with Bitbucket. In comparison, GitLab is more advanced, particularly in terms of cloud capabilities.

Setting up GitLab is smooth and straightforward. There is no complexity as long as you're familiar with the basics. A simple code can be reused, facilitating easy installation and use.

GitLab is mostly free, with potential costs arising from upgrade versions. There is a trial period of about six months during which it is free. Afterward, fees apply.

I have experience with Bitbucket and Jenkins, and both serve as alternatives to GitLab for version control and CI/CD pipelines.

I recommend GitLab for DevOps engineers. It is easy and fast to use. While Jenkins is also good for understanding, GitLab offers an easier user experience. I rate GitLab as ten on a scale of one to ten.

Mainly, we use GitLab as a source control repository, and I use GitLab CI for the CI/CD pipeline.

GitLab's source control is excellent. Having the source control and pipeline in the same platform makes integration seamless. It is already integrated, with no need to configure any webhooks or other settings. 

Implementing CI/CD with GitLab has accelerated the time to market significantly. As we implement automated testing and DevSecOps, it speeds up the process by forty to sixty percent.

GitLab should enhance its GitOps capability as they are currently using FluxCD, however, Argo CD is better and offers more features. GitLab should work on improving their user interface for GitOps as it is lagging behind.

I have been working with GitLab for more than three years now.

GitLab is very stable with no issues in performance or availability.

GitLab is highly scalable, but in our current architecture using Docker containers, it isn't. That is why we're transitioning to OpenShift for future scalability with increased user numbers.

I have interacted with architects for some advice during the implementation, and they were prompt in their response. However, I have not had to open any support tickets yet.

I have worked with several CI/CD tools, including Jenkins, Azure DevOps, Tekton, and Jenkins. GitLab CI is more powerful than Jenkins and Azure DevOps and comparable to Tekton.

The initial setup of GitLab was straightforward. We have it installed as a Linux package and as a Docker container, which took very little time.

I have used Tekton before, the vanilla version on Kubernetes and Red Hat's version of the pipeline.

Overall, I recommend GitLab to other DevOps teams due to its powerful CI capabilities and having most tools you need on the same platform. It enables seamless integration and automation. I rate GitLab nine out of ten.

When a developer checks in code, it is automatically built and deployed, and automated test cases are also run. We have extensive integration with GitLab, which helps us with source code management. We run the static code analysis using SonarQube. 

Technologies are always changing. Nowadays, new things like serverless computing and workload management have emerged. We have noticed a few gap items for faster service delivery. For example, we do user interface testing in the latest team and automate it using some tools. Recently, we integrated a tool with user interface testing, which can simulate a multi-user environment. So, we would like to see more integration with different platforms.

We normally do load testing for an hour, extending that load with two or three different use cases. We increase the load by two or three times to check how the application responds. This helps us see if the application can withstand increased load, though it may reject messages or requests when it can't handle two to three times the normal load.

We do endurance or soak testing by leaving the system at the rated load, like 300 requests per second, for 12-16 hours to observe stability. We monitor for CPU leakage, memory leakage, queue building, and similar issues. If there are any problems, we fine-tune and fix them. For performance testing, we test at multiple levels: one at the service level and two at the system level. We normally don't test at the integration level.

My company has 90 users. 

The solution's deployment is straightforward. We have containerized applications that are deployed to the environment. 

GitLab was deployed in-house. 

The main value and impact of using the product are significant. We create and maintain vulnerability-free software by integrating tools like ManageEngine, which periodically patches our runtime environments, including operating systems, kernels, and software. Additionally, we run automated Nessus scans periodically, every week and day, to identify new vulnerabilities even after applying patches.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

We do two levels of security scanning. One is at the build level, where we integrate with security packages and use tools like OWASP for top vulnerability compliance. This ensures that all third-party tools, like Tomcat and JBoss, are scanned as part of the build.

The second level is a reactive scan at runtime. We scan Oracle clients, JDKs, JBoss, Tomcat, Log4j, and other components during runtime. We also consider the operating system's security. Before we complete software testing, we use Nessus to perform a runtime security scan.

We are not using the community version of GitLab, but we are using it for ticketing and publishing the tool versioning.

The best features of GitLab are versioning and keeping track of the versions.

GitLab helps me save time and provide financial benefits, as keeping track of the updated version and the changes is money and time-saving.

GitLab has CI/CD pipeline capabilities.

I have been working with GitLab for probably six to seven years.

I am satisfied with GitLab's security, and we have not experienced any problems so far.

Regarding scalability, I did not face any issues with GitLab supporting my projects.

I have not contacted GitLab's technical support.

Neutral

I have seen benefits from using GitLab, since my directors and the team are using it, they must be happy with it.

I rate GitLab seven out of ten because nothing is perfect. I think we have to finish the conversation. I have told you what I could tell you.