GitLab Reviews

We use GitLab as a source code repository, terraform modules repository, generic packages repository and for our CI/CD pipelines.

The most valuable features of GitLab are the merge request approvals, package repository, and that GitLab CI/CD pipelines plans are written in YAML.

GitLab could improve the package repository. It does not have support for Conan packages revisions.

Additionally, better support for deploying GitLab in Kubernetes is needed (i.e. more mature helm packages and updated documentation).

I have been using GitLab for approximately five years.

The stability of GitLab is good.

GitLab is scalable. We only needed to add more resources to the VM. Horizontally, we were not able to scale it because we couldn't deploy it in Kubernetes correctly.

We have approximately 300 people using the solution in my organization.

I have not used the support from GitLab.

I previously used Gerrit and I prefer GitLab. It is much better in the interface and integration, it is much more than only Git software, it is more of a complete package.

The initial setup of GitLab is not complex. However, it can be difficult to deploy GitLab on Kubernetes.

The deployment of GitLab was done in-house.

The solution's standard license is paid annually. They have changed the pricing tiers and removed the bronze tier, which was the perfect sweet spot.
There is a free version available.

I rate the price of GitLab a seven out of 10.

I would recommend the solution to others. For a self-hosted version, I advise others to deploy it using Docker/Docker-compose, it is the easiest way. The solution has no maintenance. 

I rate GitLab a nine out of ten.

We use GitLab for all of our Git sources and it is mapped to our integrated solution for the complete ICG platform.

The most valuable features of GitLab are ease of use and highly intuitive UI and performance.

GitLab can improve by integrating with more tools, such as servers with Docker.

I have been using GitLab for approximately 11 years.

GitLab is a stable solution. We've never faced any issues.

Our current setup is with one server but GitLab overall can scale.

We have approximately 300 people using the solution. Most of the people are in the developers' teams, management, and tech leads that all log into GitLab.

GitLab can be used for enterprise-sized companies.

I have not used the support from GitLab.

I have previously used GitHub as a developer. GitLab looks similar to GitHub and it's helping the developer use it better.

We update the GitLab version annually for maintenance.

GitLab is a free solution to use.

I rate GitLab a ten out of ten.

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.

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.

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.

GitLab is used for pipeline development, automation, and deployment.

It is easy to manage.

GitLab integrates well with other platforms.

The automation is good.

While I don't have any specific complaints about GitLab, there are always things that could be better.

Better support, for example, could be provided. The technology could be made simpler to use, it should not be overly complex.

It should be used by a larger number of people. They should raise awareness.

I have been working with GitLab for three years.

GitLab has a good level of stability. I haven't had many problems.

GitLab is used by between 500 and 600 people.

Support is good.

I have used a variety of tools, including Ansible, Terraform, Bitbucket, and Bamboo.

I don't mind the price because I use the free version.

The licensing fee could be less expensive.

I would recommend this solution to anyone who is interested in using it.

GitLab is very good. I would rate GitLab a nine 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.

The solution is cloud-based. There are around 30 people using this solution in my organization. 

GitLab is kind of an image of GitHub, so it gives us the flexibility to monitor our changes in the repos. Multiple people can work on the same code and make various branches. We can merge them together and resolve conflicts. This feature makes development quite fast. Everybody gets to work on their own feature independently without waiting for someone else to complete their code first.

When deploying the solution on cloud and the CI/CD pipeline, we have to define the steps and it becomes confusing. The trend is shifting toward CI/CD pipeline automation, so GitLab could provide some features that help with CI/CD automation. 

There could also be integration with different cloud services like GCP, AWS, or Microsoft Azure. A one-click deployment with the CI/CD pipeline of our code would be a good feature.

I worked with GitLab for one year.

The solution is stable. We haven't encountered any issues with loading repos.

It's scalable. We haven't performed a lot of computation on GitLab because we're just storing our code on it. We can create as many admins, branches, and projects as we want.

I haven't contacted technical support because we haven't encountered any issues. 

Initial setup is simple. Our model and other application repo was pushed on GitLab. From there, we pushed the code into the VM and then used that to make the Docker images. The models were deployed on GCP. It was easy to deploy them on Cloud Run on GCP.

The solution isn't as expensive as other solutions.

I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.