3 ms·

Unfortunately the perception was earned a few years ago created not by running “more openly” but real user experience and breaking people of that experience ove

Unfortunately the perception was earned a few years ago created not by running “more openly” but real user experience and breaking people of that experience over several months is a long uphill battle for GitLab. I’m involved with a large group of Python developers that echos the same feeling, even though generally speaking many of us find GitLab (performance and reliability aside) a better and more comprehensive product. I’d guess this was a consequence of a strategy decision that went against the plan (probably an expectation mismatch with users). I think the large part of the problem is the public GitLab instance is (was?) the beta environment, so a lot of issues popped up constantly while people were evaluating the options. In our group we are all volunteers, so when downtime impacts the little time we can dedicate (push code, review, deploy) it’s a fairly big deal. Our python group (pyslackers.com) runs in the open as much as we can, so for us we went where the exposure and ease to be involved is (Github), even though from a raw feature perspective we liked what we had on GitLab when it worked.

emilycook 7y ago
That's definitely fair, and warrented. We haven't really had the resources for (relatively) long to put into performance when we were still in early stages. However we've constantly been improving that, to the point where I truly doubt you'd find that we suffer disproportionately from performance issues more than any competitor. Before I worked here, I was on a team that evaluated different devops tools, and I felt the same apprehension about the uptime. But we eventually chose gitlab, and the only real downtime we experienced was during the 2017 outage. And we liked having the option to switch to self-hosted if it became too much of an issue
- nerdwaller 7y ago
  There’s a pretty vocal group that favors GitLab, I campaigned for it internally at a few companies as well - having so much of the tooling in once place is pretty nice. It’s obvious that GitLab is making quick improvements consistently. The project boards are better than most others, the CI is phenomenal, and I have noticed the review process is being worked on. Keep up the good work, we need options in the space!

emilycook 7y ago

That's definitely fair, and warrented. We haven't really had the resources for (relatively) long to put into performance when we were still in early stages. However we've constantly been improving that, to the point where I truly doubt you'd find that we suffer disproportionately from performance issues more than any competitor. Before I worked here, I was on a team that evaluated different devops tools, and I felt the same apprehension about the uptime. But we eventually chose gitlab, and the only real downtime we experienced was during the 2017 outage. And we liked having the option to switch to self-hosted if it became too much of an issue

nerdwaller 7y ago
There’s a pretty vocal group that favors GitLab, I campaigned for it internally at a few companies as well - having so much of the tooling in once place is pretty nice. It’s obvious that GitLab is making quick improvements consistently. The project boards are better than most others, the CI is phenomenal, and I have noticed the review process is being worked on. Keep up the good work, we need options in the space!