5 ms·

I'm out of the loop here, what is going on with Git Lab? They were well regarded and now they are not?

throwawaypolicy 7y ago
There were basically two "scandals" recently. - GitLab announced that they were going to start including third party telemetry. This predictably annoyed developers. They made it substantially worse by originally announcing that it would be included in self-hosted enterprise versions as well (a really big no-no from many companies perspective), and by tone deaf comments from the CFO that made it clear they were going to violate the GDPR. - GitLab started talking about not allowing people working in support rolls to live in China, Russia, and Ukraine because of security concerns brought up by a customer. No one ever really came up with a good justification for why Ukraine was on the list, so it was removed (but you will still see references to it in some of the earlier discussions). Someone noticed the discussion and posted it here (and elsewhere). Communication around what they're actually planning on doing has been pretty poor, likely partially as a result of this being noticed on their public-yet-internal issue tracker instead of being released via clearly written messages. Some people have legal concerns about it (see: anti boycott laws), some have ethical issues, others think it sounds fine. Meanwhile the issue on gitlab itself has been subjected to intense astroturfing by largely new accounts which caused it to be locked. The new development today is that the director of compliance has resigned since they are of the opinion that what they are planning to do is illegal. Personally I think they're still pretty well regarded, but these two events in such close proximity have definitely given them a bloody nose.
nemothekid 7y ago
I found more interesting information in the Reddit thread. https://www.reddit.com/r/gitlab/comments/dtfccm/gitlabs_director_of_risk_and_global_compliance/f6x00sa/ https://www.reddit.com/r/gitlab/comments/dtfccm/gitlabs_dire... --- Ciresi: The countries selected were not chosen because of legal requirements, they were not chosen based on risk, they were not chosen based on political climate (as other countries are facing heightened sanctions from the US). I do hope they were not selected because a customer asked for it - or that could violate anti-boycott laws. In fact, having no objective basis for the restrictions is not conservative - it is careless. (Please let me know immediately if a customer has requested that we not do business with any particular country as that may be a reportable event.) I recommend against proceeding until you have developed a sound basis - that gets applied equally - for any exclusion of any country. Johnson: I appreciate your position. Please be aware there is an active, time-sensitive contract negotiation linked to this matter. And you need to advocate to the DRI that the company walk away from that contract in order to enact your proposal." --- I think Ciresi has been 2/2 in the recent GitLab scandals (she was also against the telemetry issue). The most obvious version of the story is now Ciresi has "gotten in the way" of sales twice now and is being retaliated upon. I'll admit, its rare to see a company flush its morals down the toilet while chasing revenue.
couchand 7y ago
In addition to the points made in sibling comments, there was the issue of them affirmatively stating that they will take anyone they feel like as clients no matter the moral implications, and simultaneously banning their employees from discussing politics.
manigandham 7y ago
They still are. Nothing of serious consequence has happened. What you're seeing is the 0.01% vocal minority creating outrage over political motives but will disappear into obscurity within days or weeks.

There were basically two "scandals" recently. - GitLab announced that they were going to start including third party telemetry. This predictably annoyed developers. They made it substantially worse by originally announcing that it would be included in self-hosted enterprise versions as well (a really big no-no from many companies perspective), and by tone deaf comments from the CFO that made it clear they were going to violate the GDPR. - GitLab started talking about not allowing people working in support rolls to live in China, Russia, and Ukraine because of security concerns brought up by a customer. No one ever really came up with a good justification for why Ukraine was on the list, so it was removed (but you will still see references to it in some of the earlier discussions). Someone noticed the discussion and posted it here (and elsewhere). Communication around what they're actually planning on doing has been pretty poor, likely partially as a result of this being noticed on their public-yet-internal issue tracker instead of being released via clearly written messages. Some people have legal concerns about it (see: anti boycott laws), some have ethical issues, others think it sounds fine. Meanwhile the issue on gitlab itself has been subjected to intense astroturfing by largely new accounts which caused it to be locked. The new development today is that the director of compliance has resigned since they are of the opinion that what they are planning to do is illegal. Personally I think they're still pretty well regarded, but these two events in such close proximity have definitely given them a bloody nose.

nemothekid 7y ago

I found more interesting information in the Reddit thread. https://www.reddit.com/r/gitlab/comments/dtfccm/gitlabs_director_of_risk_and_global_compliance/f6x00sa/ https://www.reddit.com/r/gitlab/comments/dtfccm/gitlabs_dire... --- Ciresi: The countries selected were not chosen because of legal requirements, they were not chosen based on risk, they were not chosen based on political climate (as other countries are facing heightened sanctions from the US). I do hope they were not selected because a customer asked for it - or that could violate anti-boycott laws. In fact, having no objective basis for the restrictions is not conservative - it is careless. (Please let me know immediately if a customer has requested that we not do business with any particular country as that may be a reportable event.) I recommend against proceeding until you have developed a sound basis - that gets applied equally - for any exclusion of any country. Johnson: I appreciate your position. Please be aware there is an active, time-sensitive contract negotiation linked to this matter. And you need to advocate to the DRI that the company walk away from that contract in order to enact your proposal." --- I think Ciresi has been 2/2 in the recent GitLab scandals (she was also against the telemetry issue). The most obvious version of the story is now Ciresi has "gotten in the way" of sales twice now and is being retaliated upon. I'll admit, its rare to see a company flush its morals down the toilet while chasing revenue.

couchand 7y ago

In addition to the points made in sibling comments, there was the issue of them affirmatively stating that they will take anyone they feel like as clients no matter the moral implications, and simultaneously banning their employees from discussing politics.

manigandham 7y ago

They still are. Nothing of serious consequence has happened. What you're seeing is the 0.01% vocal minority creating outrage over political motives but will disappear into obscurity within days or weeks.