3 ms·
That's the problem with these monocultures. People just assume that "well, everyone uses it, so it must be the best/have all the features". As for what Gitlab
by frenchy 7y ago
That's the problem with these monocultures. People just assume that "well, everyone uses it, so it must be the best/have all the features".
As for what Gitlab has that Gitlab doesn't:
* Built-in CI/CD that's actually pretty decent (easy to configure, you can restart subtasks, you can use your own runners)
* An issue tracker that supports estimates & time tracking. There are "solutions" for github that work with external services, but they cost money, and have strange workflows.
* The ability to self-host without huge piles of money.
* A lot of features that I'm not currently interested in, but others would be, like k8s and serverless support.
- Ayesh 7y agoOne feature that probably doesn't get enough praise is the groups. You can create groups, and nested sub groups within. This helps us a lot to separate projects into smaller groups. Sub groups inherit access and keys from their parent and ancestors.