8 ms·

I agree with you that the pick up in pace of Github's lacking features has been phenomenal, and I don't really quite understand all the love of GitLab except ro

I agree with you that the pick up in pace of Github's lacking features has been phenomenal, and I don't really quite understand all the love of GitLab except rooting for the underdog. Github is the clear industry leader, has been since essentially it's creation. It is very fast and feature-filled. It is the central location for the vast majority of code I use and see. Since the open letter to Github with the complaints of feature requests, they've really stepped up their game and made competitors really non-starters from my point of view.

markdog12 10y ago
> I don't really quite understand all the love of GitLab - Open Source - Free private repos - Free self-host (edit to add "Free") - Everything in one spot (repos, ci, review, coding environment, etc...)
- bentlegen 10y ago
  > Open source* The Enterprise edition features[1] are closed source, and these aren't strictly "enterprise-y" features like SAML authentication. It includes plenty of "basic" workflow features found on GitHub: - Rebase merge requests before merge - Use fast-forward merges when possible - Create templates for issues and merge requests - Display merge request status for builds on Jenkins CI [1] https://about.gitlab.com/features/ https://about.gitlab.com/features/
  - detaro 10y ago
    Use fast-forward merges when possible GitHub (annoyingly) can't do fast-forward merges from non-squashed PRs either. Display merge request status for builds on Jenkins CI GitLab implements basically the same API as GitHub for updating build status of commits from external services, or do I misunderstand what feature you mean? But in general I agree, there are some options GitLab reserved for EE that really feel like they should be part of the CE as well.
    - bentlegen 10y ago
      Yeah, I just chose some random features that I may have interpreted incorrectly. There are others; people can read the features page for themselves. And FWIW, I admire GitLab for their open source work. I just think it's worth distinguishing that it's not entirely open source.
      - sytse 10y ago
        Thanks for the admiration. If there are features that people think that should belong in the open source edition we're all ears. We've done so before https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931347 A feature comparison between CE and EE can be found on about.gitlab.com/features/#compare
        detaro 10y ago
        Since I'm not sure were else to report this: When googling for the fast-forward feature one of the top results was this GitHub thread, which had quite a bit of activity fairly recently: https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/issues/2324 https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/issues/2324 It seems like many posting there are not aware that this repository/bug tracker is not an official channel anymore -> maybe posting an automated comment in all issues with recent activity or locking them could help avoid confusion? If you arrive via search, you don't see the notice in the main repository description.
  - Nimimi 10y ago
    Take a look at Phabricator. It's a former Facebook project and been battle-tested at very large companies for years now. Huge open source projects like Blender, Haskell, Wikimedia and LLVM use it since it's the best open source code review tool and issue tracker. Wikimedia had a lengthy decision process and thoroughly vetted the alternatives. It has many enterprise features including code ownership, issue templates, and a Gerrit like, sane code review workflow. You can fully integrate it with your CI tool and it even displays coverage results inline and such. Ask me anything about it :) I'm not affiliated with it but am an experienced user.
    - chrizel 10y ago
      I'm evaluating GitLab at work currently - primarily for its code review features and really like it. Read a lot about Phabricator yesterday as a possible alternative, and am considering testing it. I wonder how it compares to GitLab. Is it possible to set up protected branches, where I can say, only users X and Y are allowed to push to the master branch? Can I do a code review and then finalize it when I'm finished and does the author get notified with a summary like the new GitHub code review feature? Because currently in GitLab the author does get a notification email for every line comment I make, which is also not really the perfect way of doing it. I already know that Phabricator squashes the changes into one commit, I think I can live with that. (because it promotes small code reviews) Does Phabricator have any problems with git rebase, where I'm refreshing a feature branch with the most recent master state? What I really like about the merge/pull request workflow of GitLab is, that multiple developers can work together on one feature branch while a merge request is open and can be used as a discussion platform for the changes - is this possible with Phabricator? Also I'm wondering how solid the issue tracking is, and if the project workboards can compete with Trello. Can it be used by non-developers without giving them access to the code? Looking forward to test Phabricator tomorrow.
      - superuser2 10y ago
        >Is it possible to set up protected branches, where I can say, only users X and Y are allowed to push to the master branch? Yes. I recommend (and my employer uses) a Herald rule that admits pushes to master only if the changes are in an approved Diff (unit of code review). This way you get an enforced 2-man rule, but anyone besides the author can approve the change. This is currently impossible with Gitlab AFAIK, and is the main reason I won't use it. You can also configure Herald rules to add blocking reviewers to other people's Diffs based on arbitrary criteria (i.e. touches X file and it's a Tuesday). A Diff cannot be considered approved until all blocking reviewers have signed off. Reviewers can also be groups, so you could say, for example, changes that touch Y file must be reviewed by Security, but any member of Security can sign off. >Can I do a code review and then finalize it when I'm finished and does the author get notified with a summary like the new GitHub code review feature? Yes, everything you do on a Diff is batched and happens all at once when you click "Submit" at the bottom. Inline comments, the free-form text box, and the action all come as one email. > What I really like about the merge/pull request workflow of GitLab is, that multiple developers can work together on one feature branch while a merge request is open and can be used as a discussion platform for the changes - is this possible with Phabricator? A Diff is really meant to be an individual's small, well-defined contribution. Multiple people submitting code to a one diff can get messy. This would be better modeled as many diffs. You are allowed to land diffs against branches other than Master, however this gets messy. It is not a first-class use case. My employer does not collaborate on feature branches; instead we land half-finished features into master (and production) disabled by feature flags. It is NOT a merge/pull-request workflow. It treats Git more like Subversion; Phabricator is a very sophisticated alternative to emailing patches around before SVN committing them (basically the equivalent of landing). >Also I'm wondering how solid the issue tracking is, and if the project workboards can compete with Trello. Issue tracking is totally solid, very configurable. Project workboards consist of tasks/issues, which are much more expensive to create than Trello cards: you fill out a pagelong form, pick type, severity, owning team, title, description, etc. vs just free-forming a title. However, you can drag tasks around the workboard just like Trello and it looks pretty similar. >Can it be used by non-developers without giving them access to the code? Yes. Permissions (and approval flows, and notification rules) are very configurable. Phabricator is well suited to a large organization with rules, but this suitability doesn't carry too much overheard. I don't think you could collaborate on issues with customers. Nontechnical people in your company, though, totally - we do that.
  - sytse 10y ago
    To make sure there is no confusion we now refer to ourselves as open core https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship I want to echo here what I said in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12501271 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12501271 "If there are features that people think that should belong in the open source edition we're all ears. We've done so before https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931347 A feature comparison between CE and EE can be found on about.gitlab.com/features/#compare " Regarding the examples please help me understand: 1. Can you rebase in the GitHub interface? 2. Does GitHub have an option to fast forward merges? 3. Please let me know if this is a feature people want open sourced. EDIT turns out that this is part of the open source edition already https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/app/controllers/projects/templates_controller.rb https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/app/cont... I created https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/22185 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/22185 to update the docs 4. We have a commit status API in GitLab CE https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/api/commits.html#commit-status https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/api/commits.html#commit-status and works with the open source https://github.com/jenkinsci/gitlab-plugin https://github.com/jenkinsci/gitlab-plugin We do have additional integration in EE https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/integration/jenkins.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/integration/jenkins.html BTW you might be happy to learn that what you mention as an example of typical "enterprise-y" feature is available in GitLab CE https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/integration/saml.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/integration/saml.html
    - garethadams 10y ago
      > 1. Can you rebase in the GitHub interface? > 2. Does GitHub have an option to fast forward merges? So is Gitlab's aim to just play catchup to Github?
      - sytse 10y ago
        We already have these features, we just opted to make them EE/.com only since we think they are more relevant for organizations that have more than 100 potential users. We have a broader scope than GitHub, see our announcement broadcasted on Tuesday for more information and a demo https://about.gitlab.com/2016/09/14/gitlab-live-event-recap/ https://about.gitlab.com/2016/09/14/gitlab-live-event-recap/
  - the_duke 10y ago
    So what, some advanced features are enterprise only... They have to make money after all. The 'basic' product (which is far more than basic) is open source though, which incredible.
    - bentlegen 10y ago
      There are 100% open source products out there, and I think it's worth distinguishing that GitLab is not one of them (as a GitLab employee adds elsewhere, it's "Open Core"). I'm not criticizing the product – they're welcome to open or not open source whatever they like. I'm just clarifying the description the parent used.
- elliotec 10y ago
  It's only kind of open source, and only partly. They call it open core, so saying open source outright is a bit misleading. The review feature is very new in GL, and that plus all of the things you are mentioning within "everything in one spot" is available in this update (except maybe the coding env, not sure what that means anyway), if you've read the announcement. Github also has self hosting.
  - markdog12 10y ago
    > It's only kind of open source, and only partly CE is a very large subset of EE. But yeah, maybe "open core" is a better term. > except maybe the coding env, not sure what that means anyway Koding integration (I haven't tried it yet) https://about.gitlab.com/2016/07/26/koding-and-gitlab-integrated/ https://about.gitlab.com/2016/07/26/koding-and-gitlab-integr... > if you've read the announcement I assume you meant Github's announced features? Yeah, I think they're great. > Github also has self hosting. Costs $, Gitlab has free self hosting (updated parent comment)
  - nchelluri 10y ago
    Where can I find a link about self hosted Github? Just curious to read about it.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - jfim 10y ago
      It's github enterprise: https://enterprise.github.com/features#pricing https://enterprise.github.com/features#pricing
      - nchelluri 10y ago
        Thanks. I was unaware this existed. Looks like it was launched in 2011[1]. Somehow I thought that with their (presumably, from what little I've gathered over the years) complex infrastructure setup this would be hard or impossible. I wonder if they have an Enterprise team devoted to keeping up with a SaaS mainline and how much work they have to do, or if they made/make some decisions that make this (Enterprise) a fairly self-contained "it just works" sort of thing. [1] https://github.com/blog/978-introducing-github-enterprise https://github.com/blog/978-introducing-github-enterprise
AsyncAwait 10y ago
> I don't really quite understand all the love of GitLab except rooting for the underdog. and self-hosting :-)
- Dobbs 10y ago
  github has self-hosting. It is a little pricey but that is not a product differentiator.
  - chipgap98 10y ago
    Price isn't a product differentiator?
    - elliotec 10y ago
      The feature isn't a product differentiator.
      - Whitestrake 10y ago
        If I had unlimited money, I could hire an army of coders to write me a git platform with all the features I want, and host it on all the servers, everywhere. It's simply not feasible to talk about product features in a vacuum without considering the costs. Price is a feature.
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - FireBeyond 10y ago
    No-one said it was. But the answer of self-hosting is a perfectly valid answer for "Why the love for GitLab?" when one = $0 in licensing, and the other = > $2,500/year in licensing.
    - yamaneko 10y ago
      Plus, not too long ago, GitHub restricted the number of free private repositories, for users and educational organizations. Although they offered educational plans for labs, it still had its limitations. Thus, free self-hosting was what attracted us to use GitLab in our lab.
kuschku 10y ago
> It is the central location for the vast majority of code I use and see. And that’s exactly why you shouldn’t use it. > Since the open letter to Github with the complaints of feature requests, This, and the answer from GitLab to that letter, is what made GitHub move in the first place. You need competition for a healthy market.
- matemaz 10y ago
  Here is some more competition in the form of a modular integrated tool 100% libre and open source. With a single instance of Tuleap you can have per project wildly different configurations. One project can have a scrum dashboard with GIT and pull requests, while another can be kanban and SVN with Jenkins CI, and a third could even be setup as Waterfall with CVS or other combinations. Issue tracking, or anything tracking really, document versioning and templates to get you started really quickly. It’s proven scalable as it’s already used by companies with more than 17 000 users with a single instance of Tuleap. I would love some feedback as we are actively developing it with monthly releases. You can check it out at https://tuleap.org/ https://tuleap.org/
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
lucideer 10y ago
As well as the sibling comments here, one could also argue Gitlab deserves at least partial credit for motivating this pick up in pace.
- elliotec 10y ago
  I think it was more the open letter to Github, which motivated both Github and GitLab (seen as an opportunity to compete). GitLab's roadmap yesterday surely didn't motivate or spawn the "New GitHub Universe," and I wouldn't think that Github is very nervous about GitLab currently due to it's massive lead in the market. Maybe this new round of funding made some of the folks at Github look over at Gitlab, but I doubt too much else.
  - markdog12 10y ago
    > I wouldn't think that Github is very nervous about GitLab Just my 2 cents, but I think they very well should be
    - ec109685 10y ago
      At least it puts a ceiling on what GitHub will be able to charge since from now on, they will likely ping pong on features.
  - StevePerkins 10y ago
    > massive lead in the market Ehh... dominance among open source projects, and Hacker News and Reddit thread cool points, is one thing. But in boring old terms of actually making money, how IS GitHub doing? "Enterprise" is practically a swear word here, but that's where the meaningful paying customers are. From my anecdotal experience, Atlassian absolutely dwarfs GitHub in the enterprise world... and that's just the enterprises that are willing to host code in the cloud to begin with. For large shops demanding an on-prem solution, GitLab seems to have a much better story than GitHub since that's really their business model bread-and-butter. For GitLab, the cloud hosting is basically just a marketing tool.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
detaro 10y ago
Then be a fan of of GitLab for putting the fear of competition back into GitHub ;) (It's of course not certain they are the reason they are moving again, but GitHub looked a lot like the market leader that feels like it doesn't have to bother much anymore. And they weren't entirely wrong.)
ascendantlogic 10y ago
built in CI integration is a huge draw. There are also a nontrivial amount of companies that refuse to let source code "out of the building" so they need to self host, either for real reasons or perceived.
frontendless 10y ago
Very fast? Maybe in the US, but rest of the world still has oceans in between of them. Adding 200msec+ of latency to every request makes it feel very sluggish. Maybe they should start looking into global rollout like Google, Facebook and basically every serious company having world-wide audience.
- elliotec 10y ago
  Sure, but compare the speed to Gitlab since we are on the topic.
hoorayimhelping 10y ago
I think particularly here on HN, I've seen a good deal of concern over github's social agenda and the perception that they've hired a lot of non-engineering folks to push that agenda.
- st3v3r 10y ago
  I've only seen that among members of the alt-right.
  - oldmanjay 10y ago
    The alt-right is apparently everyone's favorite new boogeyman for use in thought-free dismissal It's always disappointing to see a self-described intellectual community give over so heavily to such an obviously broken thought process, but humans being the emotionally manipulable creatures they are, it makes sense.
    - reitanqild 10y ago
      IMO: A lot of people seems to think they are smart because they belong to a powerful or politically correct group. Also a lot of people seems to think they are smart because they are rooting for the underdog or just plain contrarian. ; )

markdog12 10y ago

> I don't really quite understand all the love of GitLab - Open Source - Free private repos - Free self-host (edit to add "Free") - Everything in one spot (repos, ci, review, coding environment, etc...)

bentlegen 10y ago
> Open source* The Enterprise edition features[1] are closed source, and these aren't strictly "enterprise-y" features like SAML authentication. It includes plenty of "basic" workflow features found on GitHub: - Rebase merge requests before merge - Use fast-forward merges when possible - Create templates for issues and merge requests - Display merge request status for builds on Jenkins CI [1] https://about.gitlab.com/features/ https://about.gitlab.com/features/
- detaro 10y ago
  Use fast-forward merges when possible GitHub (annoyingly) can't do fast-forward merges from non-squashed PRs either. Display merge request status for builds on Jenkins CI GitLab implements basically the same API as GitHub for updating build status of commits from external services, or do I misunderstand what feature you mean? But in general I agree, there are some options GitLab reserved for EE that really feel like they should be part of the CE as well.
  - bentlegen 10y ago
    Yeah, I just chose some random features that I may have interpreted incorrectly. There are others; people can read the features page for themselves. And FWIW, I admire GitLab for their open source work. I just think it's worth distinguishing that it's not entirely open source.
    - sytse 10y ago
      Thanks for the admiration. If there are features that people think that should belong in the open source edition we're all ears. We've done so before https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931347 A feature comparison between CE and EE can be found on about.gitlab.com/features/#compare
      - detaro 10y ago
        Since I'm not sure were else to report this: When googling for the fast-forward feature one of the top results was this GitHub thread, which had quite a bit of activity fairly recently: https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/issues/2324 https://github.com/gitlabhq/gitlabhq/issues/2324 It seems like many posting there are not aware that this repository/bug tracker is not an official channel anymore -> maybe posting an automated comment in all issues with recent activity or locking them could help avoid confusion? If you arrive via search, you don't see the notice in the main repository description.
- Nimimi 10y ago
  Take a look at Phabricator. It's a former Facebook project and been battle-tested at very large companies for years now. Huge open source projects like Blender, Haskell, Wikimedia and LLVM use it since it's the best open source code review tool and issue tracker. Wikimedia had a lengthy decision process and thoroughly vetted the alternatives. It has many enterprise features including code ownership, issue templates, and a Gerrit like, sane code review workflow. You can fully integrate it with your CI tool and it even displays coverage results inline and such. Ask me anything about it :) I'm not affiliated with it but am an experienced user.
  - chrizel 10y ago
    I'm evaluating GitLab at work currently - primarily for its code review features and really like it. Read a lot about Phabricator yesterday as a possible alternative, and am considering testing it. I wonder how it compares to GitLab. Is it possible to set up protected branches, where I can say, only users X and Y are allowed to push to the master branch? Can I do a code review and then finalize it when I'm finished and does the author get notified with a summary like the new GitHub code review feature? Because currently in GitLab the author does get a notification email for every line comment I make, which is also not really the perfect way of doing it. I already know that Phabricator squashes the changes into one commit, I think I can live with that. (because it promotes small code reviews) Does Phabricator have any problems with git rebase, where I'm refreshing a feature branch with the most recent master state? What I really like about the merge/pull request workflow of GitLab is, that multiple developers can work together on one feature branch while a merge request is open and can be used as a discussion platform for the changes - is this possible with Phabricator? Also I'm wondering how solid the issue tracking is, and if the project workboards can compete with Trello. Can it be used by non-developers without giving them access to the code? Looking forward to test Phabricator tomorrow.
    - superuser2 10y ago
      >Is it possible to set up protected branches, where I can say, only users X and Y are allowed to push to the master branch? Yes. I recommend (and my employer uses) a Herald rule that admits pushes to master only if the changes are in an approved Diff (unit of code review). This way you get an enforced 2-man rule, but anyone besides the author can approve the change. This is currently impossible with Gitlab AFAIK, and is the main reason I won't use it. You can also configure Herald rules to add blocking reviewers to other people's Diffs based on arbitrary criteria (i.e. touches X file and it's a Tuesday). A Diff cannot be considered approved until all blocking reviewers have signed off. Reviewers can also be groups, so you could say, for example, changes that touch Y file must be reviewed by Security, but any member of Security can sign off. >Can I do a code review and then finalize it when I'm finished and does the author get notified with a summary like the new GitHub code review feature? Yes, everything you do on a Diff is batched and happens all at once when you click "Submit" at the bottom. Inline comments, the free-form text box, and the action all come as one email. > What I really like about the merge/pull request workflow of GitLab is, that multiple developers can work together on one feature branch while a merge request is open and can be used as a discussion platform for the changes - is this possible with Phabricator? A Diff is really meant to be an individual's small, well-defined contribution. Multiple people submitting code to a one diff can get messy. This would be better modeled as many diffs. You are allowed to land diffs against branches other than Master, however this gets messy. It is not a first-class use case. My employer does not collaborate on feature branches; instead we land half-finished features into master (and production) disabled by feature flags. It is NOT a merge/pull-request workflow. It treats Git more like Subversion; Phabricator is a very sophisticated alternative to emailing patches around before SVN committing them (basically the equivalent of landing). >Also I'm wondering how solid the issue tracking is, and if the project workboards can compete with Trello. Issue tracking is totally solid, very configurable. Project workboards consist of tasks/issues, which are much more expensive to create than Trello cards: you fill out a pagelong form, pick type, severity, owning team, title, description, etc. vs just free-forming a title. However, you can drag tasks around the workboard just like Trello and it looks pretty similar. >Can it be used by non-developers without giving them access to the code? Yes. Permissions (and approval flows, and notification rules) are very configurable. Phabricator is well suited to a large organization with rules, but this suitability doesn't carry too much overheard. I don't think you could collaborate on issues with customers. Nontechnical people in your company, though, totally - we do that.
- sytse 10y ago
  To make sure there is no confusion we now refer to ourselves as open core https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship I want to echo here what I said in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12501271 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12501271 "If there are features that people think that should belong in the open source edition we're all ears. We've done so before https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931347 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931347 A feature comparison between CE and EE can be found on about.gitlab.com/features/#compare " Regarding the examples please help me understand: 1. Can you rebase in the GitHub interface? 2. Does GitHub have an option to fast forward merges? 3. Please let me know if this is a feature people want open sourced. EDIT turns out that this is part of the open source edition already https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/app/controllers/projects/templates_controller.rb https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/app/cont... I created https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/22185 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/22185 to update the docs 4. We have a commit status API in GitLab CE https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/api/commits.html#commit-status https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/api/commits.html#commit-status and works with the open source https://github.com/jenkinsci/gitlab-plugin https://github.com/jenkinsci/gitlab-plugin We do have additional integration in EE https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/integration/jenkins.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/integration/jenkins.html BTW you might be happy to learn that what you mention as an example of typical "enterprise-y" feature is available in GitLab CE https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/integration/saml.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/integration/saml.html
  - garethadams 10y ago
    > 1. Can you rebase in the GitHub interface? > 2. Does GitHub have an option to fast forward merges? So is Gitlab's aim to just play catchup to Github?
    - sytse 10y ago
      We already have these features, we just opted to make them EE/.com only since we think they are more relevant for organizations that have more than 100 potential users. We have a broader scope than GitHub, see our announcement broadcasted on Tuesday for more information and a demo https://about.gitlab.com/2016/09/14/gitlab-live-event-recap/ https://about.gitlab.com/2016/09/14/gitlab-live-event-recap/
- the_duke 10y ago
  So what, some advanced features are enterprise only... They have to make money after all. The 'basic' product (which is far more than basic) is open source though, which incredible.
  - bentlegen 10y ago
    There are 100% open source products out there, and I think it's worth distinguishing that GitLab is not one of them (as a GitLab employee adds elsewhere, it's "Open Core"). I'm not criticizing the product – they're welcome to open or not open source whatever they like. I'm just clarifying the description the parent used.
elliotec 10y ago
It's only kind of open source, and only partly. They call it open core, so saying open source outright is a bit misleading. The review feature is very new in GL, and that plus all of the things you are mentioning within "everything in one spot" is available in this update (except maybe the coding env, not sure what that means anyway), if you've read the announcement. Github also has self hosting.
- markdog12 10y ago
  > It's only kind of open source, and only partly CE is a very large subset of EE. But yeah, maybe "open core" is a better term. > except maybe the coding env, not sure what that means anyway Koding integration (I haven't tried it yet) https://about.gitlab.com/2016/07/26/koding-and-gitlab-integrated/ https://about.gitlab.com/2016/07/26/koding-and-gitlab-integr... > if you've read the announcement I assume you meant Github's announced features? Yeah, I think they're great. > Github also has self hosting. Costs $, Gitlab has free self hosting (updated parent comment)
- nchelluri 10y ago
  Where can I find a link about self hosted Github? Just curious to read about it.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - jfim 10y ago
    It's github enterprise: https://enterprise.github.com/features#pricing https://enterprise.github.com/features#pricing
    - nchelluri 10y ago
      Thanks. I was unaware this existed. Looks like it was launched in 2011[1]. Somehow I thought that with their (presumably, from what little I've gathered over the years) complex infrastructure setup this would be hard or impossible. I wonder if they have an Enterprise team devoted to keeping up with a SaaS mainline and how much work they have to do, or if they made/make some decisions that make this (Enterprise) a fairly self-contained "it just works" sort of thing. [1] https://github.com/blog/978-introducing-github-enterprise https://github.com/blog/978-introducing-github-enterprise

AsyncAwait 10y ago

> I don't really quite understand all the love of GitLab except rooting for the underdog. and self-hosting :-)

Dobbs 10y ago
github has self-hosting. It is a little pricey but that is not a product differentiator.
- chipgap98 10y ago
  Price isn't a product differentiator?
  - elliotec 10y ago
    The feature isn't a product differentiator.
    - Whitestrake 10y ago
      If I had unlimited money, I could hire an army of coders to write me a git platform with all the features I want, and host it on all the servers, everywhere. It's simply not feasible to talk about product features in a vacuum without considering the costs. Price is a feature.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- FireBeyond 10y ago
  No-one said it was. But the answer of self-hosting is a perfectly valid answer for "Why the love for GitLab?" when one = $0 in licensing, and the other = > $2,500/year in licensing.
  - yamaneko 10y ago
    Plus, not too long ago, GitHub restricted the number of free private repositories, for users and educational organizations. Although they offered educational plans for labs, it still had its limitations. Thus, free self-hosting was what attracted us to use GitLab in our lab.

kuschku 10y ago

> It is the central location for the vast majority of code I use and see. And that’s exactly why you shouldn’t use it. > Since the open letter to Github with the complaints of feature requests, This, and the answer from GitLab to that letter, is what made GitHub move in the first place. You need competition for a healthy market.

matemaz 10y ago
Here is some more competition in the form of a modular integrated tool 100% libre and open source. With a single instance of Tuleap you can have per project wildly different configurations. One project can have a scrum dashboard with GIT and pull requests, while another can be kanban and SVN with Jenkins CI, and a third could even be setup as Waterfall with CVS or other combinations. Issue tracking, or anything tracking really, document versioning and templates to get you started really quickly. It’s proven scalable as it’s already used by companies with more than 17 000 users with a single instance of Tuleap. I would love some feedback as we are actively developing it with monthly releases. You can check it out at https://tuleap.org/ https://tuleap.org/
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

lucideer 10y ago

As well as the sibling comments here, one could also argue Gitlab deserves at least partial credit for motivating this pick up in pace.

elliotec 10y ago
I think it was more the open letter to Github, which motivated both Github and GitLab (seen as an opportunity to compete). GitLab's roadmap yesterday surely didn't motivate or spawn the "New GitHub Universe," and I wouldn't think that Github is very nervous about GitLab currently due to it's massive lead in the market. Maybe this new round of funding made some of the folks at Github look over at Gitlab, but I doubt too much else.
- markdog12 10y ago
  > I wouldn't think that Github is very nervous about GitLab Just my 2 cents, but I think they very well should be
  - ec109685 10y ago
    At least it puts a ceiling on what GitHub will be able to charge since from now on, they will likely ping pong on features.
- StevePerkins 10y ago
  > massive lead in the market Ehh... dominance among open source projects, and Hacker News and Reddit thread cool points, is one thing. But in boring old terms of actually making money, how IS GitHub doing? "Enterprise" is practically a swear word here, but that's where the meaningful paying customers are. From my anecdotal experience, Atlassian absolutely dwarfs GitHub in the enterprise world... and that's just the enterprises that are willing to host code in the cloud to begin with. For large shops demanding an on-prem solution, GitLab seems to have a much better story than GitHub since that's really their business model bread-and-butter. For GitLab, the cloud hosting is basically just a marketing tool.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

detaro 10y ago

Then be a fan of of GitLab for putting the fear of competition back into GitHub ;) (It's of course not certain they are the reason they are moving again, but GitHub looked a lot like the market leader that feels like it doesn't have to bother much anymore. And they weren't entirely wrong.)

ascendantlogic 10y ago

built in CI integration is a huge draw. There are also a nontrivial amount of companies that refuse to let source code "out of the building" so they need to self host, either for real reasons or perceived.

frontendless 10y ago

Very fast? Maybe in the US, but rest of the world still has oceans in between of them. Adding 200msec+ of latency to every request makes it feel very sluggish. Maybe they should start looking into global rollout like Google, Facebook and basically every serious company having world-wide audience.

elliotec 10y ago
Sure, but compare the speed to Gitlab since we are on the topic.

hoorayimhelping 10y ago

I think particularly here on HN, I've seen a good deal of concern over github's social agenda and the perception that they've hired a lot of non-engineering folks to push that agenda.

st3v3r 10y ago
I've only seen that among members of the alt-right.
- oldmanjay 10y ago
  The alt-right is apparently everyone's favorite new boogeyman for use in thought-free dismissal It's always disappointing to see a self-described intellectual community give over so heavily to such an obviously broken thought process, but humans being the emotionally manipulable creatures they are, it makes sense.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    IMO: A lot of people seems to think they are smart because they belong to a powerful or politically correct group. Also a lot of people seems to think they are smart because they are rooting for the underdog or just plain contrarian. ; )