GitLab is predominantly used for software development and practicing DevOps. GitLab CI/CD is one of the best features, and the solution is used primarily for software development.

GitLab is robust software and easy to use. There is excellent documentation available on their site but it can be overwhelming for early learners. 

They incorporate new features every September, and they have introduced their own code editor and AI features.

The pricing has been substantially increased, which is a major concern. While GitLab has a lot of documentation, the complexity and volume can be overwhelming, especially for new learners. Structuring the documentation more effectively could help alleviate this issue.

GitLab was resold for approximately two years.

The solution is stable, and there have been no noted glitches or latency issues.

The solution is easy to scale.

Customer service and support are good.

Positive

Previously we worked as resellers of other IT software like Snyk and Aqua Cloud Security.

The initial setup is medium in terms of difficulty. It's neither too easy nor too difficult.

Pricing is relatively expensive.

Previously explored solutions like Snyk and Aqua Cloud Security.

GitLab is a very good solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use GitLab in the new project for CI/CD, integration, and deployment.

You need to have a good knowledge of the product in order to use it.

I have been using GitLab for six months.

GitLab is a stable solution, and we haven’t faced any bugs.

Around 40 people are using the solution in our organization.

We previously used SVN and Jenkins. We switched to GitLab because it is an advanced tool with many new features.

The solution's initial setup is easy if you follow the official document.

We are using the free version of GitLab.

I am working with the latest version of GitLab. I would recommend the solution to other users based on their requirements. It is easy to learn to use GitLab if you understand Git commands.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution as a source code manager or version control manager.

In our software development lifecycle, GitLab is used as a component for code repository management. We use GitLab for several projects to handle code repositories. For other software projects, we use Bitbucket, but the use case for both is very similar.

Many global users prefer GitLab for its enhanced pipeline automation for CI/CD features. It stands out among source code managers due to its parent-child pipeline feature. If users want to leverage this feature, they should consider using it. It’s not the only platform with this capability, but GitLab excels in automating many operations and offers integration with other platforms.

The solution supports platforms like Azure, GCP, and AWS. This capability makes it a preferred choice, even though other platforms also offer similar integration features. Additionally, GitLab’s tendency to be independent of ownership by another major company makes it an attractive option for many developers who prefer cloud usage

The tool's UI is good. 

In the next release, I would like to see GitLab expand its integration capabilities to include platforms like DigitalOcean, which developers widely use for cloud infrastructure. Enhancing CI/CD automation features specifically tailored for DigitalOcean would be beneficial. 

I have been working with the product for more than six months. 

The solution is stable. 

The product is scalable. 

The tool's technical support is great. 

The solution is free. 

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

When a developer checks in code, it is automatically built and deployed, and automated test cases are also run. We have extensive integration with GitLab, which helps us with source code management. We run the static code analysis using SonarQube. 

Technologies are always changing. Nowadays, new things like serverless computing and workload management have emerged. We have noticed a few gap items for faster service delivery. For example, we do user interface testing in the latest team and automate it using some tools. Recently, we integrated a tool with user interface testing, which can simulate a multi-user environment. So, we would like to see more integration with different platforms.

We normally do load testing for an hour, extending that load with two or three different use cases. We increase the load by two or three times to check how the application responds. This helps us see if the application can withstand increased load, though it may reject messages or requests when it can't handle two to three times the normal load.

We do endurance or soak testing by leaving the system at the rated load, like 300 requests per second, for 12-16 hours to observe stability. We monitor for CPU leakage, memory leakage, queue building, and similar issues. If there are any problems, we fine-tune and fix them. For performance testing, we test at multiple levels: one at the service level and two at the system level. We normally don't test at the integration level.

My company has 90 users. 

The solution's deployment is straightforward. We have containerized applications that are deployed to the environment. 

GitLab was deployed in-house. 

The main value and impact of using the product are significant. We create and maintain vulnerability-free software by integrating tools like ManageEngine, which periodically patches our runtime environments, including operating systems, kernels, and software. Additionally, we run automated Nessus scans periodically, every week and day, to identify new vulnerabilities even after applying patches.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

We do two levels of security scanning. One is at the build level, where we integrate with security packages and use tools like OWASP for top vulnerability compliance. This ensures that all third-party tools, like Tomcat and JBoss, are scanned as part of the build.

The second level is a reactive scan at runtime. We scan Oracle clients, JDKs, JBoss, Tomcat, Log4j, and other components during runtime. We also consider the operating system's security. Before we complete software testing, we use Nessus to perform a runtime security scan.

The solution's most valuable features are pipelines. GitLab allows you to automate things and show them diagrammatically.

The solution is much harder to get around and organize extra features. It has fewer options, and its UI is not so user-friendly.

I have been using GitLab for one year.

GitLab is a very stable solution.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution’s scalability a seven out of ten.

Although the solution's documentation is publicly available, you have to invest much more time to read everything and understand how to get around.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is very easy and ten is difficult, I rate the solution's initial setup a six to seven out of ten.

The solution's pricing is acceptable.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten.

I got familiar with the CI part of the tool. If you want to use all the features for testing and packaging, you have to use the paid version.

Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

I use the tool for deployment. 

The tool helps to integrate CI/CD pipeline deployments. It is very easy to learn. Its security model is good. 

GitLab could consider introducing a code-scanning tool. Purchasing such tools from external markets can incur charges, which might not be favorable. Integrating these features into GitLab would streamline the pipeline and make it more convenient for users.

I have been working with the product for six years. 

I haven't encountered any bugs in GitLab. 

In our company, I estimate that around 30 people use GitLab, primarily for branching and repository management.

Our organization decided to use GitLab because it's easy to use, and its user interface is more intuitive than other tools.

The tool's deployment is easy. 

I would recommend using GitLab. It provides a repository and API, allowing you to create deployment pipelines. I rate it a ten out of ten. 

We create the pipeline and push it to GitLab to initiate the process. The cloud integration is straightforward.

When it comes to GitLab's CI/CD integration, it significantly supports our development process by accelerating deployments. With automated pipelines, we can focus more on development tasks without worrying about manual deployments, ultimately speeding up our development cycle.

In GitLab, I find the features and version control history to be most valuable for our development workflow. These aspects provide us with a clear view of changes and help us manage requests efficiently. I haven't utilized GitLab's security scanning capabilities yet. 

We plan to integrate tools like Sonicheap for code security. Currently, we use another product for security, focusing on Q4 security points.

We have used GitLab's features selectively for added security. We don't store passwords directly but use a secret manager and tools to sync passwords securely to our deployment environment.

I believe there's room for improvement in the advanced features, particularly in enhancing the pipeline functionalities. Better integration and usability within the pipeline could make a significant difference in user experience. I would suggest considering new features or functions that could streamline workflows further and make using GitLab even more efficient. Having additional functionalities that cater to specific needs could greatly enhance the overall experience with the platform.

I have been working with GitLab for the past 5 years. 

Regarding stability, while I can't rate it on a scale of one to ten, I can say that we've experienced good stability with GitLab, with no downtime or major issues.

I've had support from forums like Stack Overflow when needed. In my experience, GitLab integrates well with third-party tools like SonicWall and Slack without any major issues.

The setup process for GitLab is straightforward and easy to use.

Regarding pricing, I would rate GitLab as moderately priced, maybe around a seven or eight out of ten. It could be more flexible for clients but generally offers good value.

When comparing GitLab to competitors like Bitbucket, I find GitLab to be superior, especially in terms of features and functionality. Bitbucket still has its own strengths and is preferred by some organizations.

Overall, I would rate GitLab around eight or nine out of ten. I highly recommend it to other users for both company purposes and personal projects. GitLab provides a solid starting point for learning and working efficiently, making it a valuable tool for developers.

We primarily use GitLab for code migration and version management. It helps us maintain metadata, manage versions, and facilitate continuous integration when working in teams. When working on a feature, we create a feature branch, which allows us to work on the feature independently. Once the feature is complete, it must be merged into the main branch. This streamlines the process of deploying the application to the production environment.

We use some orchestration tools to do it. We have our own built packet manager, and that package manager interacts with the excellent migration and everything internally.

The important feature is the entire process of versioning source code maintenance and easy deployment. It is a necessity for the CI/CD pipeline.

There is a need to improve or adopt AI into the ecosystem like a co-pilot, which Microsoft has done with GitHub.

I have been using GitLab for nine years. I have worked across version management for continuous integration and deployment.

The product sometimes crashes.

I rate the solution’s stability a seven out of ten.

The solution’s scalability is good.

I rate the solution’s scalability an eight out of ten.

I have used GitHub before. GitHub now comes with an AI Assistant, similar to a copilot, its most significant advantage. With this copilot, it assists you in writing code. It provides examples and helps you rectify errors, especially during migration processes. Additionally, it offers previews of how migration can be performed. These enhancements are attributed to Microsoft’s support and involvement in OpenAI.

The initial setup is easy and depends on the target enrollment; it typically takes just a few minutes to complete. Migration is also handled efficiently, typically in less than a few minutes or between three to five minutes, depending on the data size you want to migrate. The only drawback or consequence is that you need a private Git repository, which GitLab should provide by default.

For small-scale usage, GitLab offers a free tier. For enterprise pricing, GitLab is more expensive than GitHub, as it's not as widely adopted. GitLab is the preferred choice for many developers despite its higher monthly pricing plan, which is around $126.

GitLab has improved our CI/CD processes in software dependency management. It handles conflicts between versions seamlessly, such as when merging different features into the main branch. With GitLab, there are no conflicts in the code itself. Versioning is also efficiently managed within GitLab, allowing us to easily track the latest main branches, previous branches, and releases. For example, if a software depends on specific versions, it's easily traceable using GitLab. One of the most significant advantages is the built-in DTS, which supports ample file storage. This capability allows us to store 30-40 gigabytes of repository sizes.

The code diffs available in GitLab show the differences between the older version and the current one, indicating what has been added, deleted, or modified across the codebase. This helps you understand which portions of the code have changed within a particular file, such as a Python script, aiding in traceability and version management.

The merge request feature is standard and available even in GitHub, making it accessible on most Git platforms. It is one of the fundamental features of GitLab, a free product.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We have our CI/CD pipelines set up in GitLab. It is our code base. 

The solution makes the CI/CD pipelines easy to execute. 

The tool should include a feature that helps to edit the code directly. 

I have been using the product for two years. 

The solution is stable. 

I haven't reached out to them yet. 

GitLab's deployment is easy. 

GitLab is cheap. 

Our primary use case is for source code maintenance, then doing the build and running code coverage tools like SonarQube, and then deployment.

We have seen a couple of merge requests or pull requests raised in GitLab. I see the interface, the way it shows the difference between the two source codes, that it is easy for anyone to do the review and then accept the request; the pull request is the valuable feature. 

We have only seen a couple of times on Gitlab, which we use for building some of the applications. Recently, we have heard that some of the builds were taking a long time or were not scheduled. In such cases, they had to contact the GitLab community or the GitLab organization to address these issues.  

So, there is room for improvement in regard to the issues with build times. 

In future releases, additional features could be added in post-deployment monitoring. Currently, GitLab supports CI/CD up to deployment. Anything that would assist in monitoring deployments, especially in the context of Kubernetes or Docker, would be valuable. It may not be necessary for enterprise-level use, but for midrange organizations, integrating post-deployment monitoring of infrastructures and generating reports could be beneficial.

We have been using this solution for three years now. 

The solution offers good stability. However, sometimes we do see some issues due to upgrades and patches. But a couple of times, we have seen build issues where it takes a long time, or it gets stuck, and people have to manually restart those.

It is a scalable solution in our environment. We have over a thousand end users. 

The support is very good. 

Positive

Earlier, we were using Atlassian products, and then we shifted to GitLab.

The deployment is handled by a different team. For maintenance, we get good support from GitLab. For any production issues, we hear that we get good support from GitLab. That is something good.  

My advice would be it's a very good tool for developers, especially those spread across the globe. It has a very good interface for any pull request or code review. The CI/CD pipeline is also easily built in, so we can easily build and deploy it into various environments. So that eases the developer's and the production ops team's life.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten.