6 ms·

With Google recently investing $20 million in GitLab [1] and helping them migrate from Azure to Google Cloud Platform [2][3], what are developers going to do wh

With Google recently investing $20 million in GitLab [1] and helping them migrate from Azure to Google Cloud Platform [2][3], what are developers going to do when Google inevitably acquires GitLab? Move their repositories back to GitHub, switch to BitBucket or something else entirely? [1] https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/09/gitlab-raises-20m-series-c-round-led-by-gv/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/10/09/gitlab-raises-20m-series-c... [2] https://venturebeat.com/2018/04/06/why-and-how-gitlab-abandoned-microsoft-azure-for-google-cloud/ https://venturebeat.com/2018/04/06/why-and-how-gitlab-abando... [3] https://about.gitlab.com/2018/04/05/gke-gitlab-integration/ https://about.gitlab.com/2018/04/05/gke-gitlab-integration/

iaml 8y ago
>what are developers going to do when Google inevitably acquires GitLab? Fork it and move on with their day.
- some_account 8y ago
  You will not be able to easily move away from any dominant platform because it will be not just the code but the community you leave behind. Also it's quite possible that github will add CI stuff directly into Azure and if you start using that, there may be no other product to move to with the same functionality. Vendor lock-in is a strategy that works even if you know its there. I'm building my code with the excellent CI stuff built into Gitlab today and I really don't want to move away from it because of its amazing ease of use.
  - kokey 8y ago
    As long as GitLab remains also deployable on your own infrastructure and not become a SaaS-only platform, I'll worry less about this.
    - _nalply 8y ago
      You know that GitLab offers commercial add-ons?
      - zaarn 8y ago
        You know that in most cases, they are "neat-to-have" and not essentials?
  - rorykoehler 8y ago
    This is why I'm very wary of recommending any serverless solutions. All the consultants we work with are lusting for them. It's pretty hard to push back against it.
  - amelius 8y ago
    > You will not be able to easily move away from any dominant platform because it will be not just the code but the community you leave behind. I find it hard to believe that an audience of developers can't point their browser to a different url, or search for your project using Google.
    - sleepychu 8y ago
      Right but because they're otherwise decentralised it would take co-ordinated effort and ultimately it fragments the community. What we need, if we want to solve this issue, is a federated network of servers which provide the functionality of github today.
      - amelius 8y ago
        Then I'm curious what kind of data would be shared on the federated protocol. Why can't projects be independent?
        sleepychu 8y ago
        I think primarily identity and git locations. I want stuff like the issue tracker/merge request dialog to be consistent across the federation (and of course for projects elsewhere in the network to be able to be the source for those merge requests) I don't want an account on everybody's git{lab,hub,ea,xxx} instance I want a single identity that people can trust is me. I want a way to discover and index other projects on the network. The same way that I often just go to github without knowing the name of a project just roughly what I'm looking for.
        tomxor 8y ago
        > I don't want an account on everybody's git{lab,hub,ea,xxx} instance I want a single identity that people can trust is me. I know blockchain is excessively overhyped, but to my limited understanding this appears to be a good fit... Look at how cryptocurrencies work, a wallet is singular (i.e your identity), exchanges and mining pools are numerous and independent (hosts and services for git repos). The vital part to make this work is a specification for storing the social aspects of collaborating on these platforms in a git repo itself - it can definitely be done, git is so flexible, it doesn't have to interfere with the project code or even need to be present in the visible tree of any branch - but we need that for interchangeability. This first step could be made before figuring out how to make neatly interacting network to add portability to existing platforms.
- romanovcode 8y ago
  Not all of GitLab is open source, you know that, right?
  - r3bl 8y ago
    That's a valid argument against GitHub, since they open source a ton of code, but you can't run GitHub yourself. That's not a valid argument against GitLab, which offers you the option to host it yourself, and then builds features on top of the free version. While GitLab EE isn't released using an open source license, its source is publicly available and you're allowed to make modifications to it, satisfying 2/4 essential freedoms of free software, as defined by FSF[0]: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/ https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/ [0] Open Source Initiative's definition contains 10 rights, I'm too lazy to memorize them.
kuberstone 8y ago
I think Gitlab will be bought by Google soon
hobofan 8y ago
Google acquiring Gitlab is very inevitable. GV (which is a Alphabet and not Google subsidiary) always stated that their priority is to be a VC that is as neutral as possible, and should a Google competitor be interested in acquiring a portfolio company they are open to that. Of course if you have them as an investor they will obviously try to help you with their network which can definately steer a company to a more Google friendly path.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > Google acquiring Gitlab is very inevitable. From the rest of your post, I think you mean “...very much not inevitable.”
  - hobofan 8y ago
    No. If the portfolio company wants to be acquired by Google, then taking the network they get via GV certainly makes that route easier for them. If the portfolio company decides if acquisition by another tech giant is the better route, they are free to do that and GV won't sabotage that deal. AFAIK there have been GV exits to all of the big Google competitiors.
    - quietbritishjim 8y ago
      > Google acquiring Gitlab is very inevitable This means "Google is going to acquire GitLab". > If the portfolio company decides if acquisition by another tech giant is the better route, they are free to do that and GV won't sabotage that deal. To me, this reads as "Google might not acquire GitLab".
      - hobofan 8y ago
        Yeah, wow had a brainfart their. I thought about "unavoidable" every time I wrote inevitable.
        quietbritishjim 8y ago
YouAreGreat 8y ago
> what are developers going to do when Google inevitably acquires GitLab? There are downsides to MS owning Github, but Google is in a whole separate universe of Evil. So the answer is: Move out, don't hesitate, and if there's no other viable choice, yes, move back to Gitgub.
partycoder 8y ago
Google in the past had Google Code, which was fine and had some level of success. Microsoft had Codeplex and was rather similar. Didn't use it enough to form an opinion about it. Both were largely left behind by Github.
Buetol 8y ago
You can also use another instance, like https://framagit.org https://framagit.org, which is hosted by an independent org who fights for Libre Software since many years.
- rmc 8y ago
  All your links will point to gitlab.com, you'll have top change everything again. The problem is centralization.
  - Buetol 8y ago
    Which links ? Because if I host my projects on framagit, there’s no link to gitlab except maybe for documentation
    - rmc 8y ago
      There'll be a link to framagit.org. Links from other parts of the web. When someone blogs about your software, it'll be a link to that URL etc
      - Buetol 8y ago
        Ok, you can also setup your own domain name I guess if you want to avoid that (like with github pages)
ebbv 8y ago
Buy a $5/mo VPS and self host your repositories? It’s really not that hard.
- statictype 8y ago
  And spending how many hours a month maintaining it and applying updates and security patches and setting up monitoring and dealing with downtime? The promise of these hosted services isn't the free storage/servers, its the maintenance of them. We're running our own private GitLab server but we thought long and hard before doing it.
  - ebbv 8y ago
    > And spending how many hours a month maintaining it and applying updates and security patches Looks like GitLab puts out one release a month. Not a big deal. One day a month you can roll out the latest and greatest if you really want to. I probably wouldn't even do it that often, depending on what's included. As far as all the underlying stuff, depending on what Linux distro you pick it should be pretty self maintaining nowadays for everything that's required to self host GitLab. nginx, PHP, etc. will all self update with your package manager of choice. > setting up monitoring and dealing with downtime? If you're buying a VPS you shouldn't need to worry about these. Any decent host will make sure your VM is up and have a high enough uptime to be solid for any use case short of enterprise. If you're an enterprise you might want to spend more than $5/mo. > We're running our own private GitLab server but we thought long and hard before doing it. Well that's up to you but it's really not hard.
  - krageon 8y ago
    To be fair, maintaining an (internal) gitlab server really only costs you the upgrade time. You make a snapshot, upgrade (and optionally rollback if something breaks). It takes exceptionally little time - unlike say, running your own email server.
Applejinx 8y ago
Dunno. The thing is, Microsoft knows they are ruthless. The thing that worries me about Google is, they are completely inaccessible, exist in a bubble and think they're the hero. Okay, three things.
- tluyben2 8y ago
  Yes, I do think this is the worrying part and worse, all the others try to become like them (Google). That future is scary.

iaml 8y ago

>what are developers going to do when Google inevitably acquires GitLab? Fork it and move on with their day.

some_account 8y ago
You will not be able to easily move away from any dominant platform because it will be not just the code but the community you leave behind. Also it's quite possible that github will add CI stuff directly into Azure and if you start using that, there may be no other product to move to with the same functionality. Vendor lock-in is a strategy that works even if you know its there. I'm building my code with the excellent CI stuff built into Gitlab today and I really don't want to move away from it because of its amazing ease of use.
- kokey 8y ago
  As long as GitLab remains also deployable on your own infrastructure and not become a SaaS-only platform, I'll worry less about this.
  - _nalply 8y ago
    You know that GitLab offers commercial add-ons?
    - zaarn 8y ago
      You know that in most cases, they are "neat-to-have" and not essentials?
- rorykoehler 8y ago
  This is why I'm very wary of recommending any serverless solutions. All the consultants we work with are lusting for them. It's pretty hard to push back against it.
- amelius 8y ago
  > You will not be able to easily move away from any dominant platform because it will be not just the code but the community you leave behind. I find it hard to believe that an audience of developers can't point their browser to a different url, or search for your project using Google.
  - sleepychu 8y ago
    Right but because they're otherwise decentralised it would take co-ordinated effort and ultimately it fragments the community. What we need, if we want to solve this issue, is a federated network of servers which provide the functionality of github today.
    - amelius 8y ago
      Then I'm curious what kind of data would be shared on the federated protocol. Why can't projects be independent?
      - sleepychu 8y ago
        I think primarily identity and git locations. I want stuff like the issue tracker/merge request dialog to be consistent across the federation (and of course for projects elsewhere in the network to be able to be the source for those merge requests) I don't want an account on everybody's git{lab,hub,ea,xxx} instance I want a single identity that people can trust is me. I want a way to discover and index other projects on the network. The same way that I often just go to github without knowing the name of a project just roughly what I'm looking for.
        tomxor 8y ago
        > I don't want an account on everybody's git{lab,hub,ea,xxx} instance I want a single identity that people can trust is me. I know blockchain is excessively overhyped, but to my limited understanding this appears to be a good fit... Look at how cryptocurrencies work, a wallet is singular (i.e your identity), exchanges and mining pools are numerous and independent (hosts and services for git repos). The vital part to make this work is a specification for storing the social aspects of collaborating on these platforms in a git repo itself - it can definitely be done, git is so flexible, it doesn't have to interfere with the project code or even need to be present in the visible tree of any branch - but we need that for interchangeability. This first step could be made before figuring out how to make neatly interacting network to add portability to existing platforms.
romanovcode 8y ago
Not all of GitLab is open source, you know that, right?
- r3bl 8y ago
  That's a valid argument against GitHub, since they open source a ton of code, but you can't run GitHub yourself. That's not a valid argument against GitLab, which offers you the option to host it yourself, and then builds features on top of the free version. While GitLab EE isn't released using an open source license, its source is publicly available and you're allowed to make modifications to it, satisfying 2/4 essential freedoms of free software, as defined by FSF[0]: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/ https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/ [0] Open Source Initiative's definition contains 10 rights, I'm too lazy to memorize them.

kuberstone 8y ago

I think Gitlab will be bought by Google soon

hobofan 8y ago

Google acquiring Gitlab is very inevitable. GV (which is a Alphabet and not Google subsidiary) always stated that their priority is to be a VC that is as neutral as possible, and should a Google competitor be interested in acquiring a portfolio company they are open to that. Of course if you have them as an investor they will obviously try to help you with their network which can definately steer a company to a more Google friendly path.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> Google acquiring Gitlab is very inevitable. From the rest of your post, I think you mean “...very much not inevitable.”
- hobofan 8y ago
  No. If the portfolio company wants to be acquired by Google, then taking the network they get via GV certainly makes that route easier for them. If the portfolio company decides if acquisition by another tech giant is the better route, they are free to do that and GV won't sabotage that deal. AFAIK there have been GV exits to all of the big Google competitiors.
  - quietbritishjim 8y ago
    > Google acquiring Gitlab is very inevitable This means "Google is going to acquire GitLab". > If the portfolio company decides if acquisition by another tech giant is the better route, they are free to do that and GV won't sabotage that deal. To me, this reads as "Google might not acquire GitLab".
    - hobofan 8y ago
      Yeah, wow had a brainfart their. I thought about "unavoidable" every time I wrote inevitable.
      - quietbritishjim 8y ago

YouAreGreat 8y ago

> what are developers going to do when Google inevitably acquires GitLab? There are downsides to MS owning Github, but Google is in a whole separate universe of Evil. So the answer is: Move out, don't hesitate, and if there's no other viable choice, yes, move back to Gitgub.

partycoder 8y ago

Google in the past had Google Code, which was fine and had some level of success. Microsoft had Codeplex and was rather similar. Didn't use it enough to form an opinion about it. Both were largely left behind by Github.

Buetol 8y ago

You can also use another instance, like https://framagit.org https://framagit.org, which is hosted by an independent org who fights for Libre Software since many years.

rmc 8y ago
All your links will point to gitlab.com, you'll have top change everything again. The problem is centralization.
- Buetol 8y ago
  Which links ? Because if I host my projects on framagit, there’s no link to gitlab except maybe for documentation
  - rmc 8y ago
    There'll be a link to framagit.org. Links from other parts of the web. When someone blogs about your software, it'll be a link to that URL etc
    - Buetol 8y ago
      Ok, you can also setup your own domain name I guess if you want to avoid that (like with github pages)

ebbv 8y ago

Buy a $5/mo VPS and self host your repositories? It’s really not that hard.

statictype 8y ago
And spending how many hours a month maintaining it and applying updates and security patches and setting up monitoring and dealing with downtime? The promise of these hosted services isn't the free storage/servers, its the maintenance of them. We're running our own private GitLab server but we thought long and hard before doing it.
- ebbv 8y ago
  > And spending how many hours a month maintaining it and applying updates and security patches Looks like GitLab puts out one release a month. Not a big deal. One day a month you can roll out the latest and greatest if you really want to. I probably wouldn't even do it that often, depending on what's included. As far as all the underlying stuff, depending on what Linux distro you pick it should be pretty self maintaining nowadays for everything that's required to self host GitLab. nginx, PHP, etc. will all self update with your package manager of choice. > setting up monitoring and dealing with downtime? If you're buying a VPS you shouldn't need to worry about these. Any decent host will make sure your VM is up and have a high enough uptime to be solid for any use case short of enterprise. If you're an enterprise you might want to spend more than $5/mo. > We're running our own private GitLab server but we thought long and hard before doing it. Well that's up to you but it's really not hard.
- krageon 8y ago
  To be fair, maintaining an (internal) gitlab server really only costs you the upgrade time. You make a snapshot, upgrade (and optionally rollback if something breaks). It takes exceptionally little time - unlike say, running your own email server.

Applejinx 8y ago

Dunno. The thing is, Microsoft knows they are ruthless. The thing that worries me about Google is, they are completely inaccessible, exist in a bubble and think they're the hero. Okay, three things.

tluyben2 8y ago
Yes, I do think this is the worrying part and worse, all the others try to become like them (Google). That future is scary.