4 ms·

It is good for GitLab, what a shame for GitLab's users

by ithinkso 5y ago

rvz 5y ago
> what a shame for GitLab's users Can you please elaborate about this?
- ithinkso 5y ago
  In my opinion public exit has been twisted 180 degrees. The reason for a company going public is to raise capital that individuals do not have to expand the business - build new factories, hire or whatever. After all there is much more money distributed in the public than few individuals have and in exchange you get shares in the company. I don't think GitLab is in need of that, what a lot of companies are doing now when they go public is just a method of 'cashing out'. When you have a great product as a private company your income comes from the users and you tailor and improve your product for their needs. When you go public in the above sense you're cashing out and suddenly the users shift to a product and shareholders are now what you cater for while trying to milk your 'users' as much as possible without them quitting.
  - eloff 5y ago
    I disagree with this characterisation. Gitlab is losing money. They do need the capital. While it's true sometimes shareholder interests can lead to the users getting screwed, that's a very short term and dangerous game to play. It's the equivalent of killing the Golden Goose. Companies that play that game may find themselves out of business in short order. They're opening opportunities for the competition.
riffic 5y ago
complete nonsense and FUD. I would argue that private equity has had a longer deleterious effect on product development, and also some IPOs have turned out disastrous, but it isn't a hard and fast rule to say that a company, once it goes public, automatically turns against its userbase.
whateveracct 5y ago
It's only a matter of time before I move to sourcehut I think.
- bink 5y ago
  Why?
- toastal 5y ago
  I paid for it recently. So far it's been a mixed bag for me. The core works as intended, but little annoyances can add up. I love that the design is small and light, but almost none of the languages is use are supported by Pygments for highlighting so someone browsing the code may find it off putting (GitLab I can use gitattributes to select a different but compatible Rouge highlighter). I like that NixOS is a first-class compatible image, but GitLab offered more in build options (run certain tasks only on tags, run this job on a cron, etc.). I love that I can push any markup I want to the ‘README’ of a project, but I wouldn't have to if Markdown wasn't the only option (MD's so limiting without admonitions, definition lists, block titles, ToC, etc.). Project discovery has a lot to be desired, but at least it doesn’t have gamification like “stargazers”.
  - jorams 5y ago
    > almost none of the languages is use are supported by Pygments for highlighting What languages are those? Pygments supports a lot of languages[1]. [1]: https://pygments.org/languages/ https://pygments.org/languages/
eloff 5y ago
Why?
- ithinkso 5y ago
  rvz asked me to elaborate on it in a sibling comment

It is good for GitLab, what a shame for GitLab's users

rvz 5y ago

> what a shame for GitLab's users Can you please elaborate about this?

ithinkso 5y ago
In my opinion public exit has been twisted 180 degrees. The reason for a company going public is to raise capital that individuals do not have to expand the business - build new factories, hire or whatever. After all there is much more money distributed in the public than few individuals have and in exchange you get shares in the company. I don't think GitLab is in need of that, what a lot of companies are doing now when they go public is just a method of 'cashing out'. When you have a great product as a private company your income comes from the users and you tailor and improve your product for their needs. When you go public in the above sense you're cashing out and suddenly the users shift to a product and shareholders are now what you cater for while trying to milk your 'users' as much as possible without them quitting.
- eloff 5y ago
  I disagree with this characterisation. Gitlab is losing money. They do need the capital. While it's true sometimes shareholder interests can lead to the users getting screwed, that's a very short term and dangerous game to play. It's the equivalent of killing the Golden Goose. Companies that play that game may find themselves out of business in short order. They're opening opportunities for the competition.

riffic 5y ago

complete nonsense and FUD. I would argue that private equity has had a longer deleterious effect on product development, and also some IPOs have turned out disastrous, but it isn't a hard and fast rule to say that a company, once it goes public, automatically turns against its userbase.

whateveracct 5y ago

It's only a matter of time before I move to sourcehut I think.

bink 5y ago
Why?
toastal 5y ago
I paid for it recently. So far it's been a mixed bag for me. The core works as intended, but little annoyances can add up. I love that the design is small and light, but almost none of the languages is use are supported by Pygments for highlighting so someone browsing the code may find it off putting (GitLab I can use gitattributes to select a different but compatible Rouge highlighter). I like that NixOS is a first-class compatible image, but GitLab offered more in build options (run certain tasks only on tags, run this job on a cron, etc.). I love that I can push any markup I want to the ‘README’ of a project, but I wouldn't have to if Markdown wasn't the only option (MD's so limiting without admonitions, definition lists, block titles, ToC, etc.). Project discovery has a lot to be desired, but at least it doesn’t have gamification like “stargazers”.
- jorams 5y ago
  > almost none of the languages is use are supported by Pygments for highlighting What languages are those? Pygments supports a lot of languages[1]. [1]: https://pygments.org/languages/ https://pygments.org/languages/

eloff 5y ago

Why?

ithinkso 5y ago
rvz asked me to elaborate on it in a sibling comment