6 ms·

At where I work we use Github Enterprise, which costs way more than Gitlab Enterprise, is not scalable, and barely cares about enterprise customers like ourselv

At where I work we use Github Enterprise, which costs way more than Gitlab Enterprise, is not scalable, and barely cares about enterprise customers like ourselves. Gitlab on the other hand is much cheaper, is highly scalable, runs in AWS, and is responsive to requests. Ultimately to make it as a business you need to provide what the customer wants and is willing to pay. Github never did.

mikekchar 8y ago
Have I missed something here? Why are you with Github and not Gitlab?
- wastedhours 8y ago
  Corporate inertia?
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- cease 8y ago
  The commenter may not be in a position to make the decision to switch. It's also possible that changing would incur high switching costs - although I'm not sure what they'd be.
- blattimwind 8y ago
  Generally speaking, the set of people who live with the consequences of a decision is not the same set of people who made said decision.
- coldcode 8y ago
  We have both, however some teams predate Gitlab option and corporate inertia, politics and a lack of time keep those teams from switching. In a huge company changing anything can be a major pain in the ass.
singingfish 8y ago
There are quite a few things about gitlab that smell of amateur hour with the way it's put together, but on the whole it's a really good product and I like that enough to make it usable is free open source, and the CI stuff is much nicer than any other I have used (although the way we've put it together, we've hit its limitations a bit).
- 2RTZZSro 8y ago
  You accuse Gitlab of "quite a few [problematic] things" but do not put forward even a single one of those.
  - singingfish 8y ago
    I was on mobile and on my way to bed :P. Lots of page refresh related problems, and likes to exhaust memory from time to time are the two standouts.
foobarbazetc 8y ago
We switched from GitHub Enterprise to BitBucket Server several years ago and are pretty (80%) happy with the decision. Saved an absolute truck load of money. The only issue with BitBucket Server is that it (inexplicably) does not have a commit compare view. https://jira.atlassian.com/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/BSERV-2550 https://jira.atlassian.com/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/BSER... This is such a massive oversight I have to conclude Atlassian themselves don’t use this product. It annoys us but not enough to pay GH. We don’t like GitLab as it was slow when we tested it and the UI wasn’t designed as nicely as the other two (tbh it looks like it was designed by programmers). Something about GitLab feels off and I don’t really know what it is. If MS changes the cost structure of GH Enterprise we’d probably switch back (haven’t looked into how well it integrates with Jira etc recently).
- mercutio2 8y ago
  There are many things I find frustrating about BitBucket Server (it’s super slow, for one, it’s insistence on clobbering commit strings during merges is the biggest), but I’ve never wanted a commit compare view; I don’t even know what that is. Care to explain what you would use it for?
  - Xaena 8y ago
    I'd be interested to hear about the slow behavior you're seeing. There are some tips and tricks for improving that.
    - mercutio2 8y ago
      Generally speaking, I have found Atlassian’s tools don’t scale well to megacorp usage. When there are thousands to tens of thousands of users connecting at peak times, stuff just gets extremely slow. Noticeably slower than when we all put up our own team-level Phabricator instances, although I’m obviously not adjusting for Phabricator downtime when inevitably the unofficial team sysadmin went on vacation and the server fell over. I’m sure people involved in infrastructure are working on making this better, but I don’t have any visibility into that layer.
FeloniousHam 8y ago
I was on a team evaluating Github and Gitlab for a large corporation (>10000 seats). Github was multiples more expensive than Gitlab, and unwilling to even come close on a counter offer. I am a fan of Github (and can appreciate their reluctance to deal with Enterprise headaches), but Gitlab was much more engaged and committed to win the contract. Github didn't seem to care whether they got it or not.

mikekchar 8y ago

Have I missed something here? Why are you with Github and not Gitlab?

wastedhours 8y ago
Corporate inertia?
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
cease 8y ago
The commenter may not be in a position to make the decision to switch. It's also possible that changing would incur high switching costs - although I'm not sure what they'd be.
blattimwind 8y ago
Generally speaking, the set of people who live with the consequences of a decision is not the same set of people who made said decision.
coldcode 8y ago
We have both, however some teams predate Gitlab option and corporate inertia, politics and a lack of time keep those teams from switching. In a huge company changing anything can be a major pain in the ass.

singingfish 8y ago

There are quite a few things about gitlab that smell of amateur hour with the way it's put together, but on the whole it's a really good product and I like that enough to make it usable is free open source, and the CI stuff is much nicer than any other I have used (although the way we've put it together, we've hit its limitations a bit).

2RTZZSro 8y ago
You accuse Gitlab of "quite a few [problematic] things" but do not put forward even a single one of those.
- singingfish 8y ago
  I was on mobile and on my way to bed :P. Lots of page refresh related problems, and likes to exhaust memory from time to time are the two standouts.

foobarbazetc 8y ago

We switched from GitHub Enterprise to BitBucket Server several years ago and are pretty (80%) happy with the decision. Saved an absolute truck load of money. The only issue with BitBucket Server is that it (inexplicably) does not have a commit compare view. https://jira.atlassian.com/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/BSERV-2550 https://jira.atlassian.com/plugins/servlet/mobile#issue/BSER... This is such a massive oversight I have to conclude Atlassian themselves don’t use this product. It annoys us but not enough to pay GH. We don’t like GitLab as it was slow when we tested it and the UI wasn’t designed as nicely as the other two (tbh it looks like it was designed by programmers). Something about GitLab feels off and I don’t really know what it is. If MS changes the cost structure of GH Enterprise we’d probably switch back (haven’t looked into how well it integrates with Jira etc recently).

mercutio2 8y ago
There are many things I find frustrating about BitBucket Server (it’s super slow, for one, it’s insistence on clobbering commit strings during merges is the biggest), but I’ve never wanted a commit compare view; I don’t even know what that is. Care to explain what you would use it for?
- Xaena 8y ago
  I'd be interested to hear about the slow behavior you're seeing. There are some tips and tricks for improving that.
  - mercutio2 8y ago
    Generally speaking, I have found Atlassian’s tools don’t scale well to megacorp usage. When there are thousands to tens of thousands of users connecting at peak times, stuff just gets extremely slow. Noticeably slower than when we all put up our own team-level Phabricator instances, although I’m obviously not adjusting for Phabricator downtime when inevitably the unofficial team sysadmin went on vacation and the server fell over. I’m sure people involved in infrastructure are working on making this better, but I don’t have any visibility into that layer.

FeloniousHam 8y ago

I was on a team evaluating Github and Gitlab for a large corporation (>10000 seats). Github was multiples more expensive than Gitlab, and unwilling to even come close on a counter offer. I am a fan of Github (and can appreciate their reluctance to deal with Enterprise headaches), but Gitlab was much more engaged and committed to win the contract. Github didn't seem to care whether they got it or not.