
Gitlab - dotmanish
http://gravityonmars.com/projects/gitlab/
======
rel
We just moved over to Gitlab from just pure gitolite and it is such a great
tool. Certain things like opening and assigning issues, wiki pages, merge
requests, all on our private servers are amazing. I highly suggest running
Gitlab on your servers if you're not comfortable with github or would rather
have things on your own servers.

~~~
Posibyte
We used it for a Software Engineering project in college just this last
semester. We were instructed that (as a fake client) that they needed a way to
do internal reviews through a separate agency (all fake). Of course, we
initially only used it to solve that issue in our fake software design, but
the flexibility and ease of use caused us to replace the internal Comp Sci
repository system with it. We're more than pleased with it. Both the faculty
and students so far seem to enjoy it a lot more than the previous (decrepit)
SVN system.

The chair of the department loves Git, but couldn't find a decent (open
source) web solution that could be hosted on our systems (as in not Github).
Gitlab is an amazing solution.

------
guptaneil
Just curious, why is this hosted on Github instead of on a self-hosted Gitlab
instance?

~~~
ariejan
Gitlab is not a 'github replacement' to run public projects, it's sole focus
is private repositories on your own server.

~~~
1qaz2wsx3edc
So it's more of a `github enterprise replacement`, got it.

~~~
rsobers
Still not quite right. Github enterprise requires that you pay Github to
license the software and provide support. Gitlab is free and open source --
you can clone Gitlab and start doing git project hosting without paying or
contacting anyone.

(NB: I have _no_ involvement with Gitlab.)

~~~
cdcarter
I think it would still qualify as a replacement, just an open one.

------
j45
If you're looking to poke around and try out Gitlab, it's very nice... but it
has a few unsightly snags to install that will turn away 90% of people who
just want to try it out... (including how to guides have the usual open-source
vapidly miss obvious steps, requires a specific build of Ruby, etc), the
latest version of Gitlab doesn't support certain versions of Ruby, and some
required libraries are awaiting updating.

The best angle to go with is to download an appliance VPS with Gitlab already
installed and fool around with upgrading it from there..

~~~
mbreese
The difficulty in getting it to work with CentOS/RHEL is another problem for
me. Focusing on Ubuntu is nice, but we run CentOS on our servers and even
trying out the software on that distro is quite difficult.

Or at least it was when I tried it last week. Anyone have any success with
that?

~~~
bchen
Just installed Gitlab successfully on RHEL6. Some modifications to the
installation steps:

\- I used RVM to install Ruby 1.9.3. This should be fairly straightforward.

\- adduser command has a different interface on RHEL, but it shouldn’t be hard
to figure out.

\- I used Apache ProxyPass instead of Nginx. unicorn.rb needed to be updated
to listen on a tcp port instead of a socket file.

\- Supplied init.d script did not work out of box. Some modifications were
required.

\- Redis server was installed from REMI.

Let me know where you’re stuck and I can try to help you.

I agree that Gitlab is not very easy to install, as there are many complicated
steps. The benefits of having a free private GitHub, though, were totally
worth it.

------
contingencies
We've been using it a few months and really like it.

Now we're looking to integrate it with Phrabricator
(<http://www.phabricator.com/>) which is a bit of a do-everything-goliath of
systems but we hope will enable us to do some formalization of code reviews,
security audits, and thus our deployment/release processes. (Ideally we want
these cryptographically signed off on.)

Has anyone had good experience integrating GitLab with Phabricator or other
external tools? Recommendations? Gotchas?

~~~
chrisbolt
Phabricator and GitLab seem to have a lot of overlapping functionality (repo
browsing, code review, wiki, issue tracking). What does GitLab add that
Phabricator doesn't have?

~~~
contingencies
We started off with GitLab so we're kind of used to it. It provides the
following powerful anti-features: it's both more polished and far easier to
use than Phabricator, which encourages lots of useful but esoteric and BOFH-
style development processes like forced test plans, test coverage analysis,
and pre-commit code reviews that take time for people to get used to.

Basically we're looking to leverage some more of these over time as we find
the time to invest in the learning curve, without throwing away our lovely,
easy to use, already functional, and far more polished GitLab system.

------
cnp
Just set up a gitlab instance at work, with a patch for creating public repos:
A++

~~~
sytse
Cool! Consider contributing your patch to the GitLab project, many people have
indicated interest:
[http://gitlab.uservoice.com/forums/176466-general/suggestion...](http://gitlab.uservoice.com/forums/176466-general/suggestions/3159951-allow-
public-repositories)

I run GitLab.com and it would be great to have public repo's

~~~
cnp
I followed these instructions and it worked like a charm:
[http://shanetully.com/2012/08/gitlab-internally-public-
proje...](http://shanetully.com/2012/08/gitlab-internally-public-projects/)

------
ejpastorino
Kind of old. The UI looks completely different now.

~~~
maxvs
I've recently discovered GitLab and known only current UI. After seeing those
old UI screenshoots I think previous interface was better. Current version is
highly "inspired" by GitHub (which has very good UI imo) but somehow has worse
UI/UX for me (but I'm using it only for a month or 2, so maybe it's just my
first impression). I wish there was some kind of "theme" module for GitLab.

------
bejar37
-

------
xal
Trying to build a largish software project without tooling for Pull Requests
seems almost foolish.

~~~
Kudos
You mean like this? <http://gitlabhq.com/images/screens/gitlab_project_mr.png>

~~~
tpz
Not quite. Gitlab merge requests are very useful but only act between branches
of a single repo, not across repos. Hence "merge" request, not "pull" request.

