3 ms·

I like Gitlab's OSS philosophy and documentation (including these lengthy release notes) a lot. If there's one feature I really miss in Gitlab than the limited

by ktpsns 6y ago

I like Gitlab's OSS philosophy and documentation (including these lengthy release notes) a lot. If there's one feature I really miss in Gitlab than the limited issue trackers. Despite Jira is still the "go-to" solution in many companies, I feel that many try to avoid that monster of a software, especially since Atlassian no more offers a self-hosted variant. I'd love to see more things like GANTT charts included (there is only a Kanban board display for issues, not yet some Waterfall or agile/GANTT board).

emerongi 6y ago
An issue for us is that we need to provide outside users access to support tickets. Gitlab has Service Desk, but it's useful only if it's just your engineering team looking at the issues. Service Desk issues often need attention from someone outside the engineering team, though. There's a steep step-up from Premium (which we are at) to Ultimate to get guest accounts, but even with guest accounts, we'd need to separate access of service desk tickets from internal tickets.
- ktpsns 6y ago
  Jep, I've also noticed many shortcomings from the gitlab service desk feature. For us the problem was that when replying users by email, they could not open attached files without an account on our installation. Redmine has these features since a long time, and I think it's worth for Github to catch up...
tyingq 6y ago
It does feel like Gitlab strategically keeps certain things out of the OSS product, like limiting the issues to two states.
- john_cogs 6y ago
  We use buyer based tiering to decide which tier a feature will reside in. https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/ceo/pricing/#buyer-based-tiering-clarification https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/ceo/pricing/#buyer-based-t...
  - adduc 6y ago
    > Free is for a single developer, with the purchasing decision led by that same person > Premium is for team (s) usage, with the purchasing decision led by one or more Directors Doesn't this conflict with the stewardship promise that "The open source codebase will have all the features that are essential to running a large 'forge' with public and private repositories"?
    - john_cogs 6y ago
      Thanks for the question. I shared it with @sytse and he's putting some thought into it.
    - john_cogs 6y ago
      When the tiering of a feature is being evaluated, the stewardship promise (https://about.gitlab.com/company/stewardship/#promises https://about.gitlab.com/company/stewardship/#promises) will override the guidance on our pricing page (https://about.gitlab.com/company/pricing/#buyer-based-tiering-clarification https://about.gitlab.com/company/pricing/#buyer-based-tierin...). Thanks again for the question. Edit - I've created an MR to document this on our pricing model page: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/-/merge_requests/78196 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/-/merge_request...
john_cogs 6y ago
Have you seen the Roadmap feature? It may be applicable to your use case. https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/group/roadmap/ https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/group/roadmap/

by ktpsns 6y ago

emerongi 6y ago

An issue for us is that we need to provide outside users access to support tickets. Gitlab has Service Desk, but it's useful only if it's just your engineering team looking at the issues. Service Desk issues often need attention from someone outside the engineering team, though. There's a steep step-up from Premium (which we are at) to Ultimate to get guest accounts, but even with guest accounts, we'd need to separate access of service desk tickets from internal tickets.

ktpsns 6y ago
Jep, I've also noticed many shortcomings from the gitlab service desk feature. For us the problem was that when replying users by email, they could not open attached files without an account on our installation. Redmine has these features since a long time, and I think it's worth for Github to catch up...

tyingq 6y ago

It does feel like Gitlab strategically keeps certain things out of the OSS product, like limiting the issues to two states.

john_cogs 6y ago
We use buyer based tiering to decide which tier a feature will reside in. https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/ceo/pricing/#buyer-based-tiering-clarification https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/ceo/pricing/#buyer-based-t...
- adduc 6y ago
  > Free is for a single developer, with the purchasing decision led by that same person > Premium is for team (s) usage, with the purchasing decision led by one or more Directors Doesn't this conflict with the stewardship promise that "The open source codebase will have all the features that are essential to running a large 'forge' with public and private repositories"?
  - john_cogs 6y ago
    Thanks for the question. I shared it with @sytse and he's putting some thought into it.
  - john_cogs 6y ago
    When the tiering of a feature is being evaluated, the stewardship promise (https://about.gitlab.com/company/stewardship/#promises https://about.gitlab.com/company/stewardship/#promises) will override the guidance on our pricing page (https://about.gitlab.com/company/pricing/#buyer-based-tiering-clarification https://about.gitlab.com/company/pricing/#buyer-based-tierin...). Thanks again for the question. Edit - I've created an MR to document this on our pricing model page: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/-/merge_requests/78196 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/-/merge_request...

john_cogs 6y ago

Have you seen the Roadmap feature? It may be applicable to your use case. https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/group/roadmap/ https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/group/roadmap/