5 ms·

That makes little sense for Google. The corporate cultures are very different, GitLab isn't a major money maker and it does nothing for them internally since th

That makes little sense for Google. The corporate cultures are very different, GitLab isn't a major money maker and it does nothing for them internally since they use a mono-repo. Cloud platforms can change after acquisitions. If Google wanted them they would have already bought.

jonny_eh 8y ago
Free Gitlab membership with a paid GCP account sounds attractive.
jacques_chester 8y ago
> The corporate cultures are very different Generally, companies are not bought for culture. Folks say a lot about their most valuable resource being their people, but typically a purchaser wants to buy assets. In software that will be less about cash or inventory or plants and more about customer contracts, partnerships, brands, trademarks, patents, copyrights, existing sales organisations and so on. > GitLab isn't a major money maker ... If Google wanted them they would have already bought. They might buy simply to have a hedge against Github. Gitlab comes with a lot of independent brand awareness that Google has not, so far, been able to gain against Github in this area. The cloud providers are involved in a no-prisoners effort to lock in customers while the market emerges for the first time. This is golden age of rail stuff, there are massive path dependencies that will be very difficult to unwind. Each will grow aggressively on every edge of their current surfaces, whether by implementation, partnership or purchase. Or all three, in varying orders, as they think works best. They will rapidly copy each other to try and prevent competitors gaining an unassailable lead in some segment. Disclosure: I work for Pivotal. We have partnerships with Google and Microsoft.
brazzledazzle 8y ago
It would let GCP compete with some of the code hosting services Amazon offers.
bdcravens 8y ago
Gitlab is more than just git hosting. It provides many pieces of the development workflow (like CI, staging deployments, etc). Moreover, Firebase wasn't much of a money maker either, and took a smaller amount of funding than Gitlab.
anothergoogler 8y ago
> it does nothing for them internally since they use a mono-repo Completely irrelevant; Google does not version-control their projects substantially with Git. They used Perforce for a long time and now I understand they use some internal, proprietary VCS.

jonny_eh 8y ago

Free Gitlab membership with a paid GCP account sounds attractive.

jacques_chester 8y ago

> The corporate cultures are very different Generally, companies are not bought for culture. Folks say a lot about their most valuable resource being their people, but typically a purchaser wants to buy assets. In software that will be less about cash or inventory or plants and more about customer contracts, partnerships, brands, trademarks, patents, copyrights, existing sales organisations and so on. > GitLab isn't a major money maker ... If Google wanted them they would have already bought. They might buy simply to have a hedge against Github. Gitlab comes with a lot of independent brand awareness that Google has not, so far, been able to gain against Github in this area. The cloud providers are involved in a no-prisoners effort to lock in customers while the market emerges for the first time. This is golden age of rail stuff, there are massive path dependencies that will be very difficult to unwind. Each will grow aggressively on every edge of their current surfaces, whether by implementation, partnership or purchase. Or all three, in varying orders, as they think works best. They will rapidly copy each other to try and prevent competitors gaining an unassailable lead in some segment. Disclosure: I work for Pivotal. We have partnerships with Google and Microsoft.

brazzledazzle 8y ago

It would let GCP compete with some of the code hosting services Amazon offers.

bdcravens 8y ago

Gitlab is more than just git hosting. It provides many pieces of the development workflow (like CI, staging deployments, etc). Moreover, Firebase wasn't much of a money maker either, and took a smaller amount of funding than Gitlab.

anothergoogler 8y ago

> it does nothing for them internally since they use a mono-repo Completely irrelevant; Google does not version-control their projects substantially with Git. They used Perforce for a long time and now I understand they use some internal, proprietary VCS.