3 ms·

> Gitlab is the _only_ choice when your company prefers on-prem Is that literal or figurative? GitHub Enterprise is on premises. I used it at my last company

by pfranz 7y ago

> Gitlab is the _only_ choice when your company prefers on-prem Is that literal or figurative? GitHub Enterprise is on premises. I used it at my last company which was on an air gapped network. It looks like it has been around since 2011. There are countless other self-managed variations in size and feature combinations of git hosting, ticket tracking, and other things it offers.

dijit 7y ago
Figurative. Obviously it’s possible to host git on your own servers. But github enterprise on prem is a comparatively weak offering. Githubs bread is made from people using their SaaS offerings and it shows. (I’ve used many different self hosted options for version control. Although to be fair my current company uses perforce for the overwhelming majority of its version control)
- rubidium 7y ago
  Counterpoint: My fortune 200 employer uses GitHub enterprise on site. It works great. I don’t get how you can say GitLab is the only choice?
- 2ion 7y ago
  Nonsense. Github Enterprise at my last job (used there since 2012) was so much more refined and reliable than Gitlab EE is at my job now, which has much worse UI and no good flow at all. All Github clones (like Gogs, Gitea) lean on the Github UI for a reason, ignoring Gitlab. It's a mess. Since Microsoft's acquisition, even github.com is progressing refinement at a higher pace than gitlab.com ever did, and I'll be thrilled when I get my company to switch to Github again. Pricewise, Github EE is much better value for the dollar than Gitlab EE; most features that Github doesn't have are rather half-assed than wholesomely done in Gitlab.
- fanf2 7y ago
  We use GitLab. We rejected GitHub Enterprise because it’s a closed system: we could not use it to host public open source repositories like we can with GitLab. GitHub’s sales pitch was funny, all about “inner source”, applying open source development processes to closed corporate software as if it would be a step forward, whereas we were way past that point already so it would have actually been a step backwards for us.

by pfranz 7y ago

dijit 7y ago

Figurative. Obviously it’s possible to host git on your own servers. But github enterprise on prem is a comparatively weak offering. Githubs bread is made from people using their SaaS offerings and it shows. (I’ve used many different self hosted options for version control. Although to be fair my current company uses perforce for the overwhelming majority of its version control)

rubidium 7y ago
Counterpoint: My fortune 200 employer uses GitHub enterprise on site. It works great. I don’t get how you can say GitLab is the only choice?
2ion 7y ago
Nonsense. Github Enterprise at my last job (used there since 2012) was so much more refined and reliable than Gitlab EE is at my job now, which has much worse UI and no good flow at all. All Github clones (like Gogs, Gitea) lean on the Github UI for a reason, ignoring Gitlab. It's a mess. Since Microsoft's acquisition, even github.com is progressing refinement at a higher pace than gitlab.com ever did, and I'll be thrilled when I get my company to switch to Github again. Pricewise, Github EE is much better value for the dollar than Gitlab EE; most features that Github doesn't have are rather half-assed than wholesomely done in Gitlab.
fanf2 7y ago
We use GitLab. We rejected GitHub Enterprise because it’s a closed system: we could not use it to host public open source repositories like we can with GitLab. GitHub’s sales pitch was funny, all about “inner source”, applying open source development processes to closed corporate software as if it would be a step forward, whereas we were way past that point already so it would have actually been a step backwards for us.