
GitLab acquires Gitter, will open-source the code - marcinkuzminski
http://venturebeat.com/2017/03/15/gitlab-acquires-software-chat-startup-gitter-will-open-source-the-code/
======
timanglade
Tim, Marketing at GitLab here. Sorry for the false start, a draft leaked out
via Twitter but the announcement was scheduled to run at 10 Pacific.

You can read Gitter’s post: [http://blog.gitter.im/2017/03/15/gitter-gitlab-
acquisition/](http://blog.gitter.im/2017/03/15/gitter-gitlab-acquisition/)

And here is what VentureBeat had to say about the news:
[http://venturebeat.com/2017/03/15/gitlab-acquires-
software-c...](http://venturebeat.com/2017/03/15/gitlab-acquires-software-
chat-startup-gitter-will-open-source-the-code/)

UPDATE: and here is GitLab’s post with a few more details:
[https://about.gitlab.com/2017/03/15/gitter-
acquisition/](https://about.gitlab.com/2017/03/15/gitter-acquisition/)

------
hamandcheese
Somewhat off topic, but I was once very interested in working for GitLab.
According to their compensation calculator, though, I'd be making less than
half what I make now (also working remotely). They ding me for living in a
comparatively low cost area.

I'm surprised they are able to attract talent to achieve what they have done
so far. It makes me worry somewhat about my future prospects in an
increasingly globalized talent pool.

~~~
webo
Senior Backend Engineer shows 85-95k in Chicago, which is below average. It
shows 45-55k for Fayetteville -- most _junior_ guys/gals start around 75k in
Fayetteville at mediocre companies.

~~~
graton
Yeah, similar for me. In my geo it shows ~87-98K, but if I moved to San
Francisco it is ~173-189K. Which seems foolish. They should incentivize people
to move to the lower costs geos, not penalize them.

And the listed salary for my geo is about 2/3 to 3/4 of my current base pay
before any bonuses. The idea of the company sounds good, but the pay is a deal
breaker for me. I wouldn't like feeling like I'm providing the company more
value but because the person lives in San Francisco they get twice as much
pay. Maybe that is me being petty?

~~~
ghostly_s
They're not trying to incentivize people to move to SF; they're trying to
maintain a competitive hold on the market of talent which is already there, as
the realities of our current climate are that many of the highest-talent
candidates are to be found in that pool.

~~~
majormajor
If they're ok with people working remotely, they'd do much better to pay
everyone as if they lived in a very expensive area, and attract all the people
who don't want to give up a lot of the flexibility of a large paycheck but
would love to be able to save even more of it by living somewhere cheaper.

(Their calculator also seems somewhat bonkers (on the extremely low side)
compared to the local market where I live. It seems based on a somewhat-
arbitrary, quick-and-dirty-wild-guess estimate formula vs what real, on-the-
ground competitor companies in those areas are paying.)

EDIT: there seems to be a small trend emerging where every company I've seen
with fully-public payscales/pay calculators wildly comes in below what I'm
currently making, and what I've heard from local competitors. And I'm not in
SF. Wonder if there's some causality there, though it's still just a handful.

Also it's amusing to get a downvote for offering up the info that Gitlab would
want me to take a pretty substantial ~30% haircut in base pay based on where I
live. What would be attractive to me would be "we'll give you 80% of your
current take-home, but you get to live wherever you want," but this is
basically the opposite.

------
Philipp__
Every next move by Gitlab makes them grow in my eyes, personaly. Few weeks ago
I started using it as my main "portfolio", it's not much but I really like
their way of thinking, openness and providing services. Their whole eco-system
is looking really interesting right now, and I hope they will continue to
advance and grow.

Edits: typos, wrote from phone.

~~~
oblio
They definitely have a very interesting strategy, one that is well suited to
their target market (= programmers). They're probably the most open company
I've seen. Still, I can't justify moving off GitHub, for now. Gitlab has some
growing left to do, especially on the SaaS part.

Still, good luck to them :-)

~~~
caio1982
"Gitlab has some growing left to do, especially on the SaaS part."

Some people (say, big companies) think exactly the opposite because they are
after an on-prem solution, and for that Gitlab kicks Github's ass.

~~~
jshmrsn
GitHub offers on-prem as well. Of course it's not open source and not
potentially free like GitLab
[https://enterprise.github.com/features](https://enterprise.github.com/features)

~~~
Normal_gaussian
$250/user/year, blocks of 10, min 10

Ouch. If you run your own servers already it's financially worth hosting your
own gitlab at the minimum price point.

I expect it will be the big orgs who don't move due to integration costs.

~~~
was_boring
Let's be honest, does anyone pay full price beyond 10 users? If there's
anything I've learned it's that the word "enterprise" means "negotiable." I
suspect they put that out there so they have a place to start without the
costly interaction of emails coming in saying "how much for x people."

~~~
Normal_gaussian
When their very first price point leaves it cheaper for me to do in house I'm
not wasting time negotiating.

------
nico
Up until this week I was in love with Gitlab. We've been using it at work for
over a year as our main repo, code review tool and CI (tried self-hosted
first, then moved to gitlab.com).

However, the service (gitlab.com) is constantly having issues, most of them
not reported on their status page or on their twitter status account. For the
last week it's been practically unusable, to the point where our whole dev
team combined has wasted almost a hundred hours just re-trying builds and
deployment jobs. Yesterday we tried, unsuccessfully, moving to the new AWS
tools (CodeCommit, CodeBuild and CodePipeline), and today we just moved back
to Bitbucket + CircleCI (we use RoR if you are wondering).

Unfortunately today I couldn't seriously recommend gitlab.com to anyone
needing a reliable hosted repo + CI solution (maybe self-hosted works better
though, YMMV).

Regardless, I have a deep respect for what Gitlab as a company has done so
far. After looking into repo + CI options I've realized that they've created
probably the best all-in-one platform out there, at least their
vision/concept. Wish them the best and hope to use their service again in the
near future once they have their stuff together.

~~~
sytse
Hi Nico, I'm sorry that you suffered our unreliability this week. We do try to
update @gitlabstatus for everything that we see happening, no matter how
small. We're determined to make GitLab.com a reliable platform, but we realize
we still have a long way to go.

~~~
nico
Thank you. I'm still a big fan of Gitlab and the vision you guys have. You've
built an amazing organization and you'll definitely keep doing great things.
Look forward to using your platform again in the future :)

~~~
sytse
Thanks Nico, glad to hear that you'll give us another chance.

------
sandGorgon
@sytse - this is huge. You can move the YC internal slack to gitter as well ;)

But seriously - people are willing to throw money for an enterprise gitter -
especially after [https://medium.freecodecamp.com/so-yeah-we-tried-slack-
and-w...](https://medium.freecodecamp.com/so-yeah-we-tried-slack-and-we-
deeply-regretted-it-391bcc714c81#.ki286cqbu)

Look at the number of people begging Discord to take money from them -
[https://feedback.discordapp.com/forums/326712-discord-
dream-...](https://feedback.discordapp.com/forums/326712-discord-dream-
land/suggestions/12454674-discord-as-a-replacement-to-slack-for-developers)

gitter always had search working - discord just got it recently.

~~~
sytse
Thanks Sandeep. We assume that it is easier to charge money to enterprises
than open source communities. If we see strong adoption and feature requests
from the enterprise we'll consider adopting an open-core model and charging
for it. For now the adoption is mainly from open source communities and we
think of our costs as a marketing expense.

Do you know of any enterprises using Gitter?

~~~
sandGorgon
No - because, like discord, gitter makes it a point to make privacy very hard
to set up. This is fairly deliberate and is the reason why enterprises have a
hard time adopting it.

~~~
suprememoocow
Sandeep, it's interesting that you view it that way, but it was never our
intention to deliberately make privacy hard. When creating a new room, you can
choose to make it public, private and optionally allow anyone from your GitHub
org to join your private room. See
[http://imgur.com/jIb8EKA](http://imgur.com/jIb8EKA)

It's definitely true that the product focus on Gitter has always been more on
public rooms. That's because the focus of our company has always been on the
network of public communities, rather than enterprise features, which we feel
are well represented in the market by other great products like Slack,
Mattermost, etc.

(Background: I'm CTO/Cofounder at Gitter)

~~~
sandGorgon
I completely understand and respect that. It was not a complaint - but
cognizance that you had a certain philosophy in mind.

Forget slack - look at hipchat which has far simpler privacy controls. The
ability to create an organization (NOT linked to GitHub), per channel
permissions is all that's needed. Hipchat makes this dead simple.

Lots of different people will have different requirements - some people will
need Active Directory even, but essentially the only two things needed for
enterprise messaging is permissions and search.

------
caio1982
"Next piece of wow: we will be open sourcing all of the Gitter"

The Gitlab folks really know how to do it. It is of course the rational
approach to it, but still, that's a bold move.

~~~
connorshea
For us it was natural to open the source code, we prefer to work that way. All
our source code is publicly viewable and most of it is open source.

~~~
ocdtrekkie
This just makes me hope you guys buy more things.

~~~
connorshea
Ha! Any suggestions? ;)

~~~
kstenerud
A cross platform GUI git client that doesn't suck!

~~~
ocdtrekkie
This is a pretty great idea. For what I often deal with, the GitHub desktop
client is okay (though obviously tied to GitHub), but then I was sad to also
realize they don't offer it on Linux. (Maybe they assume Linux nerds don't
need GUIs?)

I tried Tower when it was in beta for Windows, but the cost is too steep to
justify it for me. But it seemed to be a lot more full featured than the
GitHub client which isn't good for more than basic commits. And again, no
Linux there either.

I'd definitely go for a solid, open source git client, and it's obviously very
relevant to GitLab's business.

~~~
ylk
> (though obviously tied to GitHub)

You can actually use GitHub Desktop with any repo:
[https://help.github.com/desktop/faq/articles/do-you-
support-...](https://help.github.com/desktop/faq/articles/do-you-support-
hosts-other-than-github/) (Although it looks like you have to clone it first?)

------
slg
Does anyone have an insight into the differences between Slack, Mattermost,
and Gitter? I have only ever used Slack before but it seems like Gitlab is
already heavily invested with Mattermost. That makes me wonder what the future
looks like for both Mattermost and Gitter. Are they different enough that they
can both coexist without hurting either product or is one of them destined to
be folded into the other in hopes of taking on Slack more directly?

~~~
detaro
Gitter is targeted at providing a public channel around a project, Mattermost
is more Slack-like for team-internal organisation (with multiple channels,
user management etc)

~~~
Infernal
Thanks - haven't heard of Gitter, came to the comments to ask about the
potential impact to Mattermost. Sounds like there's room for these two to
coexist within GitLab.

------
jordanmoconnor
Confirmed on Twitter:
[https://twitter.com/gitchat/status/842058103571001344](https://twitter.com/gitchat/status/842058103571001344)

Link to the live post: [http://blog.gitter.im/2017/03/15/gitter-gitlab-
acquisition/](http://blog.gitter.im/2017/03/15/gitter-gitlab-acquisition/)

~~~
orb_yt
Looks like they will open source the whole thing. I'd be very interested in
learning how much Gitlab paid for this acquisition.

~~~
sytse
I'm sorry but we don't comment on acquisitions prices. Being transparent about
it is not common in the industry and us doing this by default might make
future acquisitions harder since the company being acquired might not like it.
Also see [https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/general-
guidelines/](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/general-guidelines/) "Most
things are public unless there is a reason not to. Not public by default are:
financial and legal information"

~~~
yuhong
I think even public companies often disclose the prices though, especially for
major ones. This being said, I have been thinking about the GitLab IPO,
including things like fixing Reg FD for a while now.

~~~
dragonwriter
> I think even public companies often disclose the prices though,

"Even public companies"? Public companies are required to report a lot of
financial information publicly that non-public companies are neither required
to report nor in the habit of reporting.

~~~
yuhong
The point is there probably won't be much problem in disclosing this info and
they will likely have to do so after they IPO anyway.

~~~
sytse
'Whether or not there a separate disclosure about a specific transaction
(including its price and form of consideration) depends on the size of the
acquisition relative to the size of the company and whether the acquisition is
"material." Accounting rules define "materiality" in an intentionally broad
way. From FASB Statement of Concepts #2:

The omission or misstatement of an item in a ﬁnancial report is material if,
in the light of surrounding circumstances, the magnitude of the item is such
that it is probable that the judgment of a reasonable person relying upon the
report would have been changed or inﬂuenced by the inclusion or correction of
the item.

In practice, a company's auditors will set a materiality threshold based on a
company's revenue, assets, and net income. Thus, big companies can make small
acquisitions without disclosing much.'

from [https://www.quora.com/For-a-public-company-when-does-the-
siz...](https://www.quora.com/For-a-public-company-when-does-the-size-of-an-
acquisition-have-to-be-disclosed-publicly)

~~~
yuhong
Of course, GitLab should do better than that if possible

------
erlend_sh
This is pretty weird to me:

> What about Mattermost, how is this different?

> Gitter was built to be used in the open. We’ve always seen Gitter as a
> network, or a place where people can come to connect to one another. Team
> collaboration, whilst possible, has never been a core aspect of the Gitter
> experience.

> Mattermost is a powerful, integrated messaging product for team
> collaboration - we will continue to ship and recommend using Mattermost for
> internal team communication.

Surely GitLab would be better off investing fully into a single chat-platform?
The road to making Gitter good for internal team communication is not
particularly long or windy.

------
systemfreund
When it's going to be open sourced then we could finally implement a proper
matrix.org bridge. Currently all messages are relayed through a special gitter
user called matrixbot

~~~
Arathorn
matrix-appservice-gitter actually supports 'puppeting' already - letting you
log in as your own user. But native Matrix support for Gitter would be
incredible!

------
simplehuman
This appears more like a acqui-hire. Also, since mattermost is bundled as part
of GitLab, it makes me wonder why they didn't acquire mattermost instead.

This is good though because mattermost is open-source only on paper. They
refuse to integrate important features even when people contribute code (to
protect their commercial version).

Third, people see GitLab as GitHub competitor. But really it competes with
Atlassian.

~~~
it33
Hi @simplehuman, Mattermost team here, thanks for the mention.

First, we love GitLab. While we'd be flattered with an offer to join them,
Mattermost has its own mission and motivation
([https://www.mattermost.org/why-we-made-mattermost-an-open-
so...](https://www.mattermost.org/why-we-made-mattermost-an-open-source-slack-
alternative/))

Second, regarding community contributions, we have an open and transparent
process for proposing, discussing and vetting contributions before a pull
request is made ([https://docs.mattermost.com/developer/contribution-
guide.htm...](https://docs.mattermost.com/developer/contribution-guide.html)).

When people don't follow the guidelines, and when they work hard to contribute
something before engaging with the broader community--especially when it
totally works but can't be officially accepted--we feel terrible.

Recent example:
[https://github.com/mattermost/platform/pull/5718](https://github.com/mattermost/platform/pull/5718)
Previous related example:
[https://github.com/mattermost/platform/pull/2718](https://github.com/mattermost/platform/pull/2718)

You can follow the links there to go into detailed, heated discussions around
this in our own Mattermost instance.

In our manifesto, we lay out the purpose of the open source Mattermost Team
Edition, and about the commercial Enterprise Edition
([https://www.mattermost.org/manifesto/](https://www.mattermost.org/manifesto/)),
and--at least in my mind--our decisions are based on scope (What purpose does
X serve? Where should it belong, if at all)?

Our contribution guidelines are in our docs, they're in our developer docs,
they're displayed to contributors before they can submit a merge request, and
yet with the size of our community, we still have mistakes and awkward
threads.

I hope we can do better here. If anyone would like to discuss, you're welcome
to join our community server: [https://pre-
release.mattermost.com/](https://pre-release.mattermost.com/)

Third, yes, agree, GitLab is certainly competing with Atlassian, and winning a
lot.

------
securingsincity
I hope this spurns more OSS communities to move to gitter. As much as I enjoy
slack, limits on features like search and invites creates a friction that I
think a service like gitter can help solve.

~~~
lol768
Personally the fragmentation of these random chat services does little to make
me want to get involved in project chat discussions.

I wish project maintainers would stick to a network like freenode and just
occupy a channel there dedicated to the project. I'm already set-up to take
part in discussions there, I don't need to use a web browser etc.

~~~
Perihelion
Totally agree with this. Having to join 10+ Slack-like groups to collaborate
on open source projects is unrealistic for me. As a result, I don't frequent
some projects' chats and stick to bug trackers/mailing lists -- as a result of
_that_ I miss out on a lot of the camaraderie that comes with contributing to
open source. I've missed out on a few conversations where decisions were made
too. Being in multiple groups on these services is a huge pain point for me,
whereas being on multiple IRC servers in multiple channels is far less
invasive to my time and computer resources ;D. I'm not necessarily advocating
that everyone use IRC for everything, but it seems like a lot of us had
standardized on IRC for OSS before most of these services came along _.

Also I'm salty that most of these Slack-like services have no ignore
feature/minimal moderation tools which are both things I've leaned on heavily
when working with communities. That's probably a rant for another day, but
it's related to why I really dislike using some of these things.

_This might just be my perception, but it seems like most people I come across
in this field were on IRC at some point.

~~~
mos_basik
>most of these Slack-like services have no ignore feature/minimal moderation
tools

This is what pushed me away from using Slack with a group of gamers I admin
for. I can understand Slack's desire to stick to the workplace and how that
leads to "if you need to /ignore a co-worker your company has problems
implementing /ignore in Slack can't fix." And I can understand Mattermost
wanting to become the opensource/on-prem analog of that. But it really falls
apart when you try to use that kind of system with users that don't know you,
aren't on your payroll or have issues with rules - like open source
developers, or gamers.

My group eventually switched to Discord for, among other things, its amazing
ACL-style permissions system, frictionless inviting and unlimited history
(iirc, getting history with the first tier of paid Slack would have cost us
~11k USD/year?). It's not perfect - I really hope their bot API gets some
love, and of course the ability to host your own server would be nice (though
I understand some of the catch-22's there) - but I like it a LOT and I keep
encountering new groups of people with Discord servers where I can just idle
using one client. This is MUCH more IRC-like experience than I ever got with
Slack (for instance, switching between or getting/setting notification alert
levels on several different servers is much more ergonomic on Discord than on
Slack).

I've not used Gitter a whole lot - just a couple of times when I had a
question for some project that had one - but my impression is that it leans
more towards "chat with strangers about $topic" (like Discord) and less
towards "chat with colleagues about work" (like Slack). In that respect, I'd
lay a small amount of money that Gitter does have an /ignore command, among
other tools that you miss from IRC.

------
brandnewlow
I'm a member of a Gitter for a smart mirror project. It's been a fun way to
connect with other fans of the project and the maintainers. Feels like a smart
move.

~~~
sytse
Thanks Brad, glad to hear you like the move.

------
Dangeranger
This seems like a good match.

I've been helping some early coders in the FreeCodeCamp Gitter and have been
impressed with the quality of the app for a company with little capital. They
have done a lot with short resources.

It would be better in my opinion for small Slack communities to transition to
Gitter since Slack has said they do not plan to support large scale free
communities in the long term.

edit; typo

~~~
suprememoocow
Thank you Dangeranger! FreeCodeCamp is an incredible community and we've been
glad to be able to support them in doing the amazing work that they're doing.
Hopefully this announcement will help them go from strength to strength!

------
yani
That is awesome news. I have been using Gitlab for the last year. I switched
over my personal projects and 3 organizations I was advicing from GitHub. They
won me with their data centers in Asia and Europe. GitHub is extremely slow in
Asia and they do not want to change.

------
catshirt
i was just hating on GitLab here a few days ago so i will take the opportunity
to say this is really cool on a bunch of levels.

------
ohstopitu
I love Gitlab but sadly, quite a lot of services that offer free accounts for
open source projects (TravisCI comes to mind), generally don't integrate with
Gitlab

It's one of the few reasons why I am still using Github :( .

~~~
therealmarv
Generally I have the opinion that the CI of gitlab is much more powerful
because of real Docker usage (and also works on private repos for free).
Speaking about the gitlab CI... why is there no status or statistics page
about it on status.gitlab.com and why is a new build pending over 30 minutes
currently (now) ?

~~~
jobvandervoort
You can find some public monitoring regarding CI on GitLab.com here [0].

I agree that we should have some status on CI as well, made an issue [1].

[0]:
[http://monitor.gitlab.net/dashboard/db/ci](http://monitor.gitlab.net/dashboard/db/ci)

[1]: [https://gitlab.com/gitlab-
com/infrastructure/issues/1360](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-
com/infrastructure/issues/1360)

~~~
therealmarv
Wow that gitlab monitor on [0] looks really great. Thanks! Can I ask which
software that is? :)

~~~
jobvandervoort
It's Grafana [0], backed by Prometheus [1].

[0]: [https://grafana.com/](https://grafana.com/)

[1]: [https://prometheus.io/](https://prometheus.io/)

------
realPubkey
Maybe we can then fix all the UI-bugs in gitter which pissed me on so often.

------
kureikain
I really like Gitlab and this acquiring.

When I firsted started as a developer, I don't know how people do thing in
real production. I don't know how real company build real software.

Nowsaday, with all open source thing from real company that acquire/shutdown I
can finally learn a lots from them.

Recently Stajoy open source everything, now Gitter is next. I'm sure I will
learn a lot by consume the real code that run on production.

Thank you Gitlab/Gitter.

------
nxrabl
Discussion at:
[https://gitter.im/gitterHQ/gitter](https://gitter.im/gitterHQ/gitter)

The goal seems to be to have the code open sourced by this June, with all
history included.

Stack details here:
[https://stackshare.io/gitter/gitter](https://stackshare.io/gitter/gitter)

------
omouse
Hah, nice. Love it, love it that a whole business can run on free/open source
and selling hosting/support.

------
marknadal
Congrats to the gitter team, you guys are awesome and have a way (far far
superior) product than slack.

------
radarsat1
What the heck is Gitter? A public chat service? Sounds like adding yet a new
way for people to bug you about things that don't work, but without the
controlled discussion of opening a proper Issue. As a developer or maintainer,
what value does this bring to a project?

~~~
kzisme
It ties chats to Github repos/issues. I've never had any luck with clicking on
one. IRC is much more useful in my opinion. I suppose they could make it work
in some fashion, but opening an issue should suffice...

------
dorianm
Think about your favorite github repo, or even just a very specific one, and
there is always a few people talking about this repo:
[https://gitter.im/rails/rails](https://gitter.im/rails/rails)

------
dang
Url changed from
[http://blog.gitter.im/p/7e1c7194-347e-47f1-84d1-8149de853e03...](http://blog.gitter.im/p/7e1c7194-347e-47f1-84d1-8149de853e03/),
which disappeared.

~~~
sytse
Thanks Daniel, sorry for circulating a draft post early.

------
DeepAndDark
I hope the search in gitter-chanels gets better now, cause of open-sourcing
it. There are good infos and tips hidden. Maybe tags or upvotes would solve
this.

------
itchyjunk
Have used gitter a few times. I've heard it lacks moderator tolls from the
channel owners a few times. OpenAI has their channel there too.

------
orsenthil
The blog post is now up: [http://blog.gitter.im/](http://blog.gitter.im/)

------
mkurz
Would be interesting to know how much they paid

------
ChuckMcM
So the race to acquire the next team dev solution heats up. Slack + github +
trello equivalent

~~~
sdesol
From what I've read so far, I get the impression, Gitter was purchased solely
for marketing value. And in a lot of ways, is quite ingenious. I would
suspect, 80% if not more of the discussions that occurs on Gitter, revolves
around repos that are hosted on GitHub.

By tapping into those conversations, they'll probably be better able to
identify GitHub pain points and provide subtle hints and nudges, for Gitter
users to consider GitLab.com

------
sherpajack
So somewhat eerily, my Gitter GitHub public repo authorization token shows
that it was accessed within the past 2 days, despite my not having logged in
to any Gitter pages in months.
[http://imgur.com/a/aABi8](http://imgur.com/a/aABi8)

------
dewiz
next, I hope to see some "content" offer attached to gitlab's ecosystem, for
instance a strong collaboration with stackoverflow/OSQA

~~~
suprememoocow
Gitter has been working on a content system called Topics.
[https://gitter.im/gitterHQ/topics](https://gitter.im/gitterHQ/topics). It's
still in Beta, but Q&A and structured content is definitely something that -
in addition to chat - we think is important.

(edit: typo)

~~~
scrollaway
That's really awesome! Does it run like a mailing list system? One of the #1
pain points in running FOSS projects is creating and managing a mailing list,
with archive browsing that doesn't look atrocious.

------
alpb
Can mods fix the link please, it's currently 404.

~~~
wyldfire
Perhaps this was a premature disclosure of the acquisition? Is an 8-K filing
required for privately held companies?

~~~
piker
No

~~~
yuhong
But yea, one of my favorite topics is the NDA.

------
iplaw
Looks like the Gitlab v. Github battle rages on.

------
gregjw
Solidly great business decision, well done.

------
m0sa
`git pull gitter`

~~~
connorshea
More like `git merge gitter` :)

------
dantrevino
great news!

------
dantrevino
great news

------
romanovcode
This leads to 404. Their official blog says nothing about it
([http://blog.gitter.im/](http://blog.gitter.im/)) and Twitter also says
nothing about it ([https://twitter.com/gitchat](https://twitter.com/gitchat)).

~~~
jonknee
I just read it a couple of minutes ago, maybe the announcement was posted
early?

~~~
romanovcode
Probably. Who ever did push the "Publish" button is probably biting his nails
:)

~~~
timanglade
In this case we didn’t even press “Publish” :) The original link was just a
preview link that was shared internally so people could review the
announcement. Unfortunately someone received it without proper context, didn’t
realize it was a draft/preview link, and thought it was ready to share.

------
ausjke
thought gitter is part of github, what an ignorance.

