5 ms·

> Open source* The Enterprise edition features[1] are closed source, and these aren't strictly "enterprise-y" features like SAML authentication. It includes pl

> 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.

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.