33 ms·

It has integrated CI whereas GitHub requires using a third-party CI system, it's had Reaction Emoji (called Award Emoji for GitLab) for a while now, it has "Mer

It has integrated CI whereas GitHub requires using a third-party CI system, it's had Reaction Emoji (called Award Emoji for GitLab) for a while now, it has "Merge when build succeeds", CE is entirely FOSS, etc.

sytse 11y ago
Thanks! People also seem to like our new todo's https://about.gitlab.com/2016/03/02/gitlab-todos-feature-highlight/ https://about.gitlab.com/2016/03/02/gitlab-todos-feature-hig... that allow you to respond to what's important even if your mailbox is a mess.
ianleeclark 11y ago
I'd honestly be really surprised if Github didn't end up acquiring one of those CI systems which they already integrate with.
- sdesol 11y ago
  I'd be surprised if they did. I really don't see a business reason for them doing so. They are clearly laser focused on enterprise, which means massively bespoked internal build systems and work flow. And they'll be competing against a lot of entrenched internal solutions. GitLab and Atlassian have a pricing model for displacing existing systems and encouraging adoption, but I can't see GitHub following suit. GitHub looks to like they want to be the Apple in the Apple vs Android. Android has the largest user base but due to Apple's premium pricing, they have the largest profit.
- dominotw 11y ago
  There seems to be a healthy competition between various ci software that works with github. Why would github try to kill that and take on such a high touch area. Its quite puzzling why gitlab went that route, they are basically discouraging ci systems from integrating with them. I think this is would turn out to be a bad decision for gitlab.
  - tiplus 11y ago
    Well, their CI is pretty good for starters... compared to self hosting jenkins, or paying for Travis CI. Self hosting gitlab integrated CI runners is a big plus for me. As a third party service provider you could still host and/or modify those CI runners for specific tasks like node, go, etc.
    - sytse 11y ago
      Thanks tiplus! And to give some additional background to dominotw's question. We didn't like the options for CI on-premises. And by integrating it directly into GitLab it is very easy set up a new project, encouraging people to use CI on more projects. Having people use GitLab CI will mean GitLab is a less attractive platform for other CI products. We do have a good commit status API since GitLab 8.1 and there is a great Jenkins plugin that supports that http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/integration/jenkins.html http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/integration/jenkins.html

sytse 11y ago

Thanks! People also seem to like our new todo's https://about.gitlab.com/2016/03/02/gitlab-todos-feature-highlight/ https://about.gitlab.com/2016/03/02/gitlab-todos-feature-hig... that allow you to respond to what's important even if your mailbox is a mess.

ianleeclark 11y ago

I'd honestly be really surprised if Github didn't end up acquiring one of those CI systems which they already integrate with.

sdesol 11y ago
I'd be surprised if they did. I really don't see a business reason for them doing so. They are clearly laser focused on enterprise, which means massively bespoked internal build systems and work flow. And they'll be competing against a lot of entrenched internal solutions. GitLab and Atlassian have a pricing model for displacing existing systems and encouraging adoption, but I can't see GitHub following suit. GitHub looks to like they want to be the Apple in the Apple vs Android. Android has the largest user base but due to Apple's premium pricing, they have the largest profit.
dominotw 11y ago
There seems to be a healthy competition between various ci software that works with github. Why would github try to kill that and take on such a high touch area. Its quite puzzling why gitlab went that route, they are basically discouraging ci systems from integrating with them. I think this is would turn out to be a bad decision for gitlab.
- tiplus 11y ago
  Well, their CI is pretty good for starters... compared to self hosting jenkins, or paying for Travis CI. Self hosting gitlab integrated CI runners is a big plus for me. As a third party service provider you could still host and/or modify those CI runners for specific tasks like node, go, etc.
  - sytse 11y ago
    Thanks tiplus! And to give some additional background to dominotw's question. We didn't like the options for CI on-premises. And by integrating it directly into GitLab it is very easy set up a new project, encouraging people to use CI on more projects. Having people use GitLab CI will mean GitLab is a less attractive platform for other CI products. We do have a good commit status API since GitLab 8.1 and there is a great Jenkins plugin that supports that http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/integration/jenkins.html http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/integration/jenkins.html