GitLab Reviews

GitLab can be deployed on-premise and in the cloud and it is used for DevOps.

The most valuable feature of GitLab is its security.

The price of GitLab could improve, it is high.

I have been using GitLab for approximately one year.

The stability of GitLab is good.

GitLab is scalable.

The support from GitLab is good.

The price of GitLab could be better, it is expensive.

I rate GitLab a seven out of ten.

I've used the solution just for my learning purposes. My company is using currently GitLab. We are using it for our CI/CD purposes for continuous integration and continuous deployment.

To my knowledge, my company started to use it as there were no decent alternatives to GitLab when they started to use it. The only decent alternative was GitHub, however, it was lacking in the CI/CD pipeline capabilities. At that time there were no GitHub actions available at the moment.

Of all available products, it was the easiest to use and easy to install.

The solution should be more cloud-native and have more cloud-native capabilities and features. It should be more GitOps-ready.

I started using the solution a year ago. My company has used it for four years.

I cannot speak to how stable the solution is. From what I have seen so far, there were no serious issues with GitLab.

Approximately four to five developers and maybe a couple of QA testers and a couple of DevOps engineers are responsible exclusively for GitLab maintenance and support.

Technical support has mostly been good.

Positive

I tried to learn a little bit about Jenkins, however, it was only through some internet content.

At the moment of the GitLab acquisition, I was not working for the company. I did not handle the implementation process.

We need at least a couple of technicians, engineers, for deployment and maintenance. 

Our own technical team handled the deployment. 

When I was hired (in 2020) they told me that they were using an open-source version. I'm not sure if that's still the case as it's a quite big company. Nowadays they should be using some kind of paid version, as the demand is pretty high, as far as I know.

I'm not sure of the exact licensing costs. 

We are customers and end-users.

As far as I know, we are using the on-premise version. There are two versions of GitLab - the on-premise and the cloud version. We are using on-premise. As far as I know, we also keep making sure it's up-to-date.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I work in PMO, and I standardize the workflows for scrum teams, AI teams, and kanban teams. If I have some scripting in Jira, and I need to save it in GitLab.

It is our source-code repository. It's used for the BI process, continuous integration, and continuous development. It's used for DevOps people. All of our IT people use GitLab.

The source-code repository is great. 

I really like the pipelines.

The stability is good. 

We'd like to see better integration with the Atlassian ecosystem. There needs to be better and native integration. That is really useful for us as Atlassian Jira has strong integration with Bitbucket, and Bitbucket is a computation of GitLab.

We've used the solution for a long time. I've used this solution for one year at this company. However, I've used it for five or eight years. 

The solution is always working. I haven't experienced problems with GitLab.

My company is 100 people, however, my instance of IT people has 10,000 people in Jira. I work with a lot of developers.

I've never used technical support. I can't speak to how helpful they are. 

We changed Bitbucket for GitLab.

I'm not the main of GitLab. I did not initially set up the product.

We've likely seen an ROI. 

I don't deal with any licensing aspects of the solution. I can't speak about the exact costs. 

We are customers and end-users. 

I'd rate the solution 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.

Overall, we've been very satisfied with the solution.

Our partner is very helpful if we need technical support. 

We like that we can have an all-encompassing product and don't have to implement different solutions.

The solution can scale. 

We would like to generate document pages from the sources. Right now, we can't do that.

The testing could be better in that, for the code quality, now we use an external product and maybe the internal product could be more efficient.

We have been working with GitLab for two years on a simple installation. Now, we have upgraded it and we might go to the enterprise solution.

The solution is scalable. If you want to, you can move over to the enterprise version of the solution.

We get our technical support via a partner and we have found them to be very helpful and responsive. We are happy with them. They work fine.

Previously, we used Jenkins and GitLab without the pipeline and the Runner.

We have a partner that assisted in implementing the process for us.

Our partner had assisted us in the initial setup process. 

It's not part of my duties to cover licensing and pricing. I can't speak to any details in relation to the costs. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We've been very happy with the product.

We're a customer and an end-user. 

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 using it for building mobile applications and web applications. I am supporting the code in GitLab. It is only for giving access to my development team, and I just see what merge requests are coming.

I like GitLab from the CI/CD perspective. It is much easier to set up CI/CD and then integrate with other tools.

In the free version, when a merge request is raised, there is no way to enforce certain rules. We can't enforce that this merge request must be reviewed or approved by two or three people in the team before it is pushed to the master branch. That's why we are exploring using some agents.

I have been using this solution for more than six months.

It seems stable.

I didn't find any scalability issues so far. We have around 50 members who use this solution. Around 20 of them use it on a daily basis.

One of my colleagues got in touch with them, and his response was that their technical support was not that great. The details that they provided for the question were not that great.

We also use GitHub. Earlier GitLab was more favored, but now GitHub has everything that is there in GitLab. If GitHub is offering more, then there might be chances of switching to that. I am not attached to either of these solutions. If things are working better for me in GitHub, I will move to GitHub.

It is simple. You just create one repo and then give access. It takes maybe 5 to 10 minutes.

Its price is fine. It is on the cheaper side and not expensive. You have to pay additionally for GitLab CI/CD minutes.

Initially, we used the free version. When we ran out of GitLab minutes, we migrated to the paid version.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate GitLab an eight out of ten.

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.