3 ms·
I selfhost gitlab for years now. My preffered road.
by number6 4y ago
I selfhost gitlab for years now. My preffered road.
- bdcravens 4y agoIf you need the features in the Premium offering, you still have to purchase licensing.
- dijit 4y agoThere's only a couple of missing features (for me, anyway) if you self host compared to the premium licensed self-hosted version (which, insanely, is the same price as the SaaS product!): * CODEOWNERS EDIT: Not true anymore! -- ~ * Protected branches (IE; preventing people committing to master/main) ~ * Approval Rules in merge requests * Merge trains (auto-merging if another merge request depends on another). * Viewing Jira issues in Gitlab
- mantas 4y agoProtected branches is no longer premium-only.
- number6 4y agoMerge trains would be nice, protected branches definitely exist. Never missed the other features tbh
- matthew-wegner 4y agoI did a quick Slack bot that messages a channel with open merge requests every morning. I really wanted to show the approval status, too, just as a reminder for someone to go "oh, that's approved, I should go merge". But the entire approval-related API fields are deliberately removed on free tier, not just the web UI "require approval" functionality. I found this to be pretty heavy handed, especially for a self-hosted instance.
- bink 4y agoNot trying to excuse the behavior but from what I've heard talking to other SaaS vendors... self-hosted is often priced similarly to the SaaS offering because even though the hosting costs are paid by the customer the support costs are often much higher.
- sScTE9qEMCxEk34 4y agoI'm sure the hosting costs are a rounding error for Gitlab for the vast majority of ("cloud") customers. Knowing how big some repos are, storage is probably their biggest cost... and, coincidentally enough, they charge for that a la carte!