@sytse: it is one of the best documented and well packaged pieces of software these days. Specially in the Ruby world. Thank you for that. Gitlab really makes a difference.
Where others just distribute Docker images or directly nothing (because omg it is too hard to do proper packaging), Gitlab has nice packages for CentOS, Debian and Ubuntu (the distros that usually run in production servers).
We had an old install from git using mysql. Migrating to Omnibus and converting the DB to postgresql was painless. Surprisingly, it was a perfectly documented process without any pitfalls, or any outdated info. Omnibus packages are just wonderful. apt-get upgrade will just do all the necessary, DB migrations and restart all the components with almost zero downtime.
This proved to me that Gitlab actually gives uttermost care to the CE edition and that it is not just marketing.
So thank you Gitlab for being so awesome.
We spend a lot of time making our Omnibus packages a flawless install and upgrade experience. Docker images are great but for many users Docker is not an option.
GitLab CE is just as performant and easy to upgrade as EE and we strive to keep it that way https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship
Currently our team member Axil is upgrading a GitLab installation from 5.0 all the way to the latest version to ensure it is as smooth as it can be https://twitter.com/gitlab/status/698236575231119360
If you want to know more about upgrading GitLab please see https://about.gitlab.com/update/
Great to hear that after converting to Omnibus the updates are smooth. We try to help all our users, customer or not.
Lintian check results for /home/algo/Descargas/gitlab-ce_8.4.4-ce.0_amd64.deb:
E: gitlab-ce: maintainer-address-missing GitLab B.V.
Good Kubernetes instructions (from a RedHat person if I'm correct) are on http://www.projectatomic.io/blog/2015/01/deploying-a-contain...
There is also a great community docker image that has Kubenetes instructions https://github.com/sameersbn/docker-gitlab/tree/master/kuber...
BTW I'm also passionate about making it easier to deploy apps hosted on GitLab to Kubernetes, see https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/3286 for more details.
Is the free (free as in beer, I'm not an open source zealot otherwise) Gitlab not just a part of the conversion funnel, eventually made unsustainable once growth plateaus?
There will always be an open source version of GitLab, more than 1000 people contributed and it the most popular self-hosted option, used on-premises by more than 100,000 organizations. They will keep going with the open source version, with our without GitLab Inc.
But the MySQL purchase by Sun and Oracle has shown what can happen to projects when the company is acquired. The best option we saw is to at least codify our promise to the rest of the community in https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship
When we break our promise it is time to fork.
Any suggestions are appreciated.
> preserve our culture, mission and goals.
Pick one. Or is there a historic precedent I'm unaware of?
On a serious note, the shift in the latter parameters can be smaller than in an acquisition, but to "preserve" would imply actively managing employee (and founder) expectations in the build-up to IPO.
Other (unrelated) minor things:
- SAML support exists, but at last check was mostly broken. Universities in particular use SAML over OAuth (See http://www.incommonfederation.org/participants/)
- Resource usage seems very high for small shops; will there be a GitLab "lite"? ...would be especially awesome if it didn't need a mostly dedicated container and could drop in as a subfolder of an existing site (with minimal resource requirements).
Saml support should be pretty good, it was contributed by CERN and they use it in production. Please see http://doc.gitlab.com/ce/integration/saml.html for documentation. If you encounter a bug please create an issue on https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues
We will try to reduce memory usage by something like 20% in the coming year. We have package for the Raspberry Pi 2 if you're into that. But GitLab will always be large due to its many features. For more details see https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/inst... If you want something with minimal requirements I recommend Gogs https://gogs.io/
(installation instructions) https://about.gitlab.com/downloads/#raspberrypi2
(original blog post) https://about.gitlab.com/2015/04/21/gitlab-on-raspberry-pi-2...
I run our Shibboleth IDP among other things, and I was told by the team that was looking at GitLab at the time that it was impossible to tie it in with the currently available SAML SP plugins. This was over a year ago, maybe things have improved...
Actual question, do you have much Australian based business and do you see yourselves needing account managers there (here) in the near future?
We just hired our first person for APAC sales, Michael Alessio https://about.gitlab.com/team/
We don't have any open positions now but you can always shoot him a mail. michael@ company domain, please include a reference to this comment
1. gitlab.com site search is effectively down. A simple keyword search, e.g. for 'omniauth' takes 45 seconds:
I periodically find other site links which are surprisingly slow, like this one.
2. I'd really like to add GitLab oauth2 as a first-class citizen for people to sign in to my apps( e.g. http://nonstop.qa/users/sign_in ), along with GitHub and Google. Adding those two were easy, but I haven't found a working, maintained Ruby omniauth GitLab adapter.
Thanks, and good luck!
2. GitLab is an OAuth 2.0 provider, for the docs see http://doc.gitlab.com/ce/integration/oauth_provider.html I see that there is https://github.com/linchus/omniauth-gitlab updated 5 months ago, did you try that one?
And yep, I've tried that OAuth provider. This is me, raising an issue about it not working: https://github.com/linchus/omniauth-gitlab/issues/10
all i read is that it's EE, but will it be brought to CE is the bigger question, and how does that fall into your current roadmap for upcoming releases in CE?
Follow up, do you plan on adding any code intelligence to your EE search, such as being done by the team at sourcegraph.com?
The way I see it is like this...
github, sourcegraph & gogs all are missing the ability to categorize repositories in groups. This is a must when you have a lot of repos, thanks for including it.
gogs = super fast, minimalistic but solid.
github = $$$$$$
stash/bitbucket = nickel and diming over features & $$$$
sourcegraph = not mature enough, missing code intelligence for majority of the languages we use
gitlab ce = great feature set, bad search and some performance struggles (that i see you are addressing)
in the end, we are likely to go with your product, but the search in CE almost hurts my feelings to use. (me: search for "test" in all repos: 0 results. search for "test" in specific repo: 1 result. me: scratch my head)
all in all, really excited to kick stash out and give my team a deeper feature set to play with.
Thanks for taking the time to come here, I'm late to the party.
The code management analytics we're planning to build are detailed in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/112 I think this is quite different from sourcegraph
Your search in CE looks like a bug to me. It would be great if you can reproduce this on GitLab.com and open an issue for it.
The following features are most concerning:
https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/issues/112 (This one I am not as much concerned about, it's very complicated it seems, I can understand a bit why this would be EE)
The squash functionality is likely to stay EE only since it is similar to rebasing. Rebasing is EE only because larger enterprises are more likely to have this workflow.
Regarding the 'test the merge' functionality I've only heard requests from large organizations for that, can you detail the context in which you want to use it?
The code analytics is a typical enterprise feature in my view.
I think that the private/confidential issues in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/3678 is something that are needed for really large organizations and for people hosting on GitLab.com, so in my view it can be EE only.
For all of the above I try to keep an open mind, so feel free to push back. Based on discussions here we do decide to merge features into CE, for example the branded homepage https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931690
'Test the merge' is something that we already get from GitHub. Travis CI tests both the merge and the branch itself. I think it only makes sense to test both, in fact, if I were to choose one way for a Merge Request, I would just test the merge result.
We have IoT Platform SDKs (See https://github.com/IOT-DSA/sdk-dslink-dart and https://github.com/IOT-DSA/sdk-dslink-java for examples) that at somepoint I would like to pitch the idea to move from GitHub to GitLab fully. We currently utilize GitLab for only a portion of our projects. We find it really helpful that Travis CI tests both the merge result and the branch, and even though I could look over it to switch GitLab (because let's face it, GitLab > GitHub), I would love to be able to tell the other developers that they will only be gaining functionality.
As for the code analytics, I have second guessed myself, and I completely agree with you now. This is definitely something that I see most useful in the enterprise setting.
There are a couple of ways to implement this feature and we're discussing them in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/4176 Feel free to join the conversation and/or contribute it. For now this feature is planned for 8.7 but this might change.
See https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/pull-requests#How-Pull-Reque... and http://cl.ly/3L303u2j072x/Image%202016-02-13%20at%207.17.57%... for how Travis CI checks both.
There might be some confirmation bias here going on. In my experience, a lot of enterprise clients I've worked with are using Gitlab. I'm yet to see one major open source project on Gitlab, apart from gitlab itself.
I tried to use GitLab in a classroom setting, and it went okay. One of the reasons we decided against using it the next year was the apparent lack of an archival backup feature (c.f. my Stack Exchange [question](http://serverfault.com/q/627618/172148) on the matter.)
We'd like to start completely fresh every year, so that former course assistants and students don't have access, but we'd also like to keep around the old data (for various reasons). Given that GitLab can only restore a backup to the same version that generated it, the only option this left us with was to archive the whole VM, which just feels sloppy.
I understand that this feature is not a priority and is a relatively large technical undertaking, so I'm not holding my breath on it getting implemented; even so, I thought that sharing my experience would be valuable.
Once again, thank you for engaging with the community and for such a great product.
I think archiving the whole VM makes sense.
Another solution would be to start with a fresh namespace/group each year instead of a fresh server.
What's the current status of the GitLab.com infrastructure? Are you still on Azure, and if so, how has it been? Does it seem like things are humming along and stable now, or do you foresee some more growing pains before things are rock solid?
Thanks for participating in the community discussions.
I have a question/comment in terms of the UI that GitLab provides for developers.
Are there any plans to add a customizable dashboard for gitlab? Think social media sites like twitter/fb/g+. They all have notification numbers over the icons signalling the amount of new emails/messages etc.. gitlab needs the option to add these to the sidepanel!
It would be so darn useful to have say, 5 extra icon counters for whatever project/merge request search filters one is currently using.
2 extra sidepanel contexts showing
- big red '5' counter on icon for merge requests with author bob, on project xyz. Because bob made 5 comments on merge requests on project xyz
- big red '2' counter on icon for merge requests with author karen, bob or steve on project abc. ditto as above.
I think extra 'tweakability' features like this for Gitlab's UI would make it easier to manage complex development environments where its necessary to keep an eye on many different scopes around a project. and have the abliity to evolve the dashboard's info display over the projects lifetime as 'hotspots' of attention need to be shifted around to different service codebases and team members.
Any chance of that happening soon?
To rephrase: There are folks willing to give you cash right now to be the host for their projects. Would there be a way to convince you to take it?
We do not think that paying for hosting itself makes sense, see https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/#why-gitlab-com-will-be-...
Instead of giving cash to use I would encourage people to move their projects and contribute by adding the features they need or helping our people, see https://about.gitlab.com/about/#donations
I recently started to mirror my repositories between GitHub and GitLab (they're just really small R packages).
It was very simple to update my local git config file so that "git push origin master" now pushes changes to both GitHub and GitLab.
I've also made it clear in the README how to install from GitLab.
Three minor annoyances:
* GitLab doesn't support Rmarkdown in .Rmd files, so my vignettes look great on GitHub, but not GitLab.
* I wanted to start an R Group (and did so), where people could share their R related projects all in one place. Unfortunately, as the projects are only shared with the group, they don't display when publically looking at the group if not signed in.The group image is also broken. 
* Relative links don't quite work the same, so some README links still only point to GitHub, as they were broken on the GitLab mirror. (Might just be user error!)
I also have a self-hosted installation running for a couple of private projects. It's on a small DO instance and does thrash resources a little, but generally works fine for two developers.
Thanks for such a useful product!
1. GitLab uses the awesome Rouge library to do syntax highlighting, this does support R https://github.com/jneen/rouge/blob/master/lib/rouge/lexers/... but apparently Rmarkdown is broken. I hope someone will contribute this to Rouge.
2. If you want to display the projects publically please make them public. If I misunderstood please let me know.
3. Please email firstname.lastname@example.org about the broken group image and reference this comment. I'm sorry it is not working.
4. Relative links took a lot of work but I didn't hear any complains in the last few months. If it is not user error please open an issue.
5. If you self-hosted installation thrashes consider switching to the Omnibus packages (if you haven't done so already) and increasing memory. For memory requirements please see https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/inst...
Thanks again for your comment.
I filed a bug: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/support-forum/issues/541
One thing: I never managed to make GitLab pages work. It may just be me, but I find the existing documentation very confusing, unclear what should be the name of the repo to host the static website, which conventions are used etc. I would appreciate a better tutorial.
We are planning to write a blog post about it with a walkthough https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/blog-posts/issues/39
It has been said that that GitHub has many killer features that are lacking in Gitlab or Bitbucket (e.g. Github has better issues handling, prettier graphs). Do you agree? And if you do, what features of Gitlab would you like to improve to compete with Github's killer features?
For features that we like to have please see https://about.gitlab.com/direction/
I mean, there is gitlab.com, there is ee, weird multi user licenses, community edition, githost etc.
you need to simplify entry.
Multi user licenses are common in the industry but I don't like them either so we're switching to subscriptions you can buy per user before either GitLab 8.5 or 8.6.
Only one question: We want to use Gitlab CI for Continuous Deployment, but I can't find any meaningful resources to build a django project and deploy it e.g. on another server or docker instance. Do you have any information about this?
The file we use to test GitLab itself (a Rails app) can be found on https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/.gitlab-...
With the rest of the community we're working on more tutorials, I heard one about iOS projects was pretty close https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/blog-posts/issues/29
I've create an issue to improve the discoverability of the CI examples https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/13410
Why is the gitlab.com option so cheap, even for corporations even if they pay for support? I understand you're still trying to gain market share more than be profitable right now but as a company paying nothing for the product certainly makes me feel like it might go away at any moment and even if we pay for support we may not receive the level of support that we need.
As corporate users, maybe we're not gitlab's target audience right now but aside from those questions it seems like a nice alternative to github, especially with regards to the additional ability to have pull requests rebased before merge...
Our self hosted option currently is more popular than our SaaS one. More than 100,000 organizations use it because they can't use a SaaS for legal, integration, technical and security reasons (want it behind VPN, integrate with other on-premises services, etc.).
GitLab.com is free because we make enough money with GitLab EE to pay for it. For more context and to understand why we think this is sustainable please see https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-com/#why-gitlab-com-will-be-...
a) I know some projects which would love to move to gitlab from sourceforge, but you don't provide mailing lists like the latter, right?
b) Why is your git-blame feature so fragile? It barely works for me, almost always shows the "error" page.
c) Since you shut down gitorious you have published a mirror to get the data out (thanks! finally!), but I don't find one repository in your list in here :( : https://gitorious.org/index-list.html it was called banshee-community-extensions/windows-binaries.git or something like that.
b) I think there is something wrong and have created an issue https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/13413
c) sorry it took so long for the mirror to be copied to the internet archive, I've asked for help with your question but this will likely take a couple of days.
It works great, I really like this project, I think it beats any alternative hands down.
I really like the accurate documentation for upgrading between versions from source (keep it up !).
I think there is a very good balance between EE-CE features, I find that the availability of the features is well thought of.
I don't use GitLab-CI at the moment (running buildbot), are there any plans to integrate support for builtbot ? or on the other hand, edit history of the CI (in jenkins you can simply delete any entry you'd like).
Keep it up ! besides the CI, GitLab offers me everything I currently need.
We would love to see support for buildbot. I found https://pypi.python.org/pypi/buildbot-gitlab/0.1.2
And with the commit status api introduced in GitLab 8.1 it should be easy for CI products to support GitLab.
It's been a long coming for the open source community.
1) Is there a way for me to make modifications to the front-end and still keep those changes when I upgrade?
2) What kind of server should I be using the fastest git pulls/pushes? Currently, my server is running on a 30GB SSD DO droplet with 1GB RAM.
1. No, but after a discussion on HN https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931690 we did decide to merge the branded login page into CE. If you are looking for another front-end change please let me know.
2. Per our requirements https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/blob/master/doc/inst... I would advise 2GB of RAM.
Thanks for the requirements link, I must've missed that.
Having people pick custom fonts might make it hard to get the design right for everyone.
Reapplying changes in Omnibus is hard since it is shipped without a git repo, so you can't use git stash or git merge. You would need to switch to an installation from source but we don't recommend that.
I really hope you can contribute the changes you would like to see, GitLab's frontend can still use a lot of polish.
I am currently very happy with my self-hosted GitLab instance for my personal projects. But I would love to have some of the EE features (both for my workflow and experience working with enterprise tools) and I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. However open source is very important to me so my question is do you think it would ever be possible to purchase a personal use EE instance without license keys, calling home, and under an open source license?
Also as an ops engineer I love how hassle free our Gitlab instance has been to maintain.
A burndown chart is something we planned to do now that we have issue weights. I couldn't find the issue for it so I created on https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/13422
One possible workflow -
1. User defines perf metrics in some metadata file in repo.
2. User checks in data for metrics with every commit.
3. Gitlab shows a view of the metrics changing over time.
Obviously you should ensure that your performance tests are run on the same type of machine every time. But you can do this by labeling runners.
We're working on making it faster in https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/operations/issues/42
* Depending on the browser width, the description of the icons on the left disappears. It should always be there, I'd rather have a horizontal scrollbar than not knowing which button does what.
* Fixed headers. Vertical screen space is the most important thing to me, so there should be nothing on the top blocking the stuff I want to read. Also please don't start to animate it or let the header slide in when I scroll up.
* Infinite scrolling.
* Icon fonts. I don't like the default font. If I block it, some icons don't work anymore.
3. Do you mean the animation? You don't do this yet.
1. I agree that these browser functions are broken. I think the speedup is worth it but that is personal. BTW Turbolinks are a default feature of modern rails apps, doesn't mean they are right but they are common.
3. We don't plan to do this either as far as I'm aware.
5. Icons in SVG would be nicer but that looks like a lot of work.
I have to say: Gitlab's support seems to be top-notch. I'm sorry for being a bit harsh and thanks for the kind response! :)
To add to sytses:
- We're introducing some more pagination over infinite scrolling. If we see this is successful, we might continue that trend
- eventually we will replace the icons with svgs, probably when we switch to our inhouse icons. There is no due date for that, though.
Codes of Conduct are a form of Socio-Political entry-ism by which third party activists try to interject a vaguely defined set of Behavioral, Ideological and Speech codes which participating individuals must accept in order to participate.
Once Instituted activists can try and use these 'Codes' as a pretext to attack there perceived political and social enemies in the project. Attempt to expel developers can spread across all social media, email, and any other information that can be dug up.
Attempts to redefine project goals and redirect resources away from there original purpose towards social and political objectives set by the entrants are also attempted. Generally turning open productive software communities into unproductive, divisive, monoculture, that serve as ideological vehicles.
It is important that FLOSS software development is politically and socially neutral. Open to anyone who wants to contribute and learn and help improve the code. I hope that GitLab will endorse political and ideological neutrality which opens the door for everyone to participate by keeping Codes of Conduct out of your terms of service.
Unfortunately until this Code of Conduct is withdrawn and links with serial Harasser and political entriest Coraline Ada Ehmke are removed I can not endorse or contribute to GitLab.
I do hope GitLab removes the Contributor Covenant and replaces it with a more honest and inclusive statement.
Codes of conduct will not increase participation in your project they will reduce participation. No one wants to be part of a nanny state where political ideologues like Coraline Ada Ehmke poor over social media and attack you when they read things that disagree with there personal political and religious beliefs.
Project leaders and Platform providers can remove the door for entry-ism by simply removing third party codes of conduct. If you still feel the need to have some community guidance keep it simple to the point and honest.
So, I read the their code of conduct, and nothing struck me as wrong (well, aside from that link back to the Contributor Covenant homepage, which is wrong, breathlessly hyperbolic, and politically charged).
Then I had a couple of realizations:
1. A sign on all public trash cans and dumpsters saying "MOTHERS, DO NOT THROW AWAY YOUR BABIES. YOU WILL BE PROSECUTED" would be correct, but it would be insulting because it implies the sign is necessary.
2. The existence of the code of conduct could be a dog-whistle. It could signal to the Caroline Adas of the world "We'll do whatever you want." Or even "Pease, please, please leave us alone. We'll do whatever you want". Both would be bad.
After we already watched its predecessor Sourceforge fill opensource projects with malware too. One day we're going to look back on all this and laugh "well that was bloody stupid!"
Even Git was created to free the comunity from the commercial restritions of BitKeeper, and the first thing we've done with git is make it centralised and proprietary again.
(Granted the friendlier UI and social network layer is needed, and Github has done a fantastic job there, but holy cow does this feel like watching a trainwreck)
I personally wouldn't recommend gitlab and hope someone else is out there working on something better.
That said, are you sure you don't have a very old version? There is a simple path for accessing code in a branch, you can just click the repo, then on the button that shows the number of branches ("N branches"), then click on the branch you want. If you want to see the files in an older commit of that branch, just click on "History" and then "browse files" on the commit line.
Free unlimited private repos w/ 10GB storage per repo (including LFS!) is fantastic. A recent project I worked on involved integrating ~15 upstream modules into a build process. Having the ability to set up a git repo for each module instead of thinking 'maybe I can come up with some hack to do this with less repos' is huge.
Having Gitlab CI w/ the ability to use your own workers just by running a single docker command is the icing on the cake.
And the fact that the repos which need to stay on our own infrastructure can also use GitLab - with an open source option to boot - is what makes choosing GitLab a very easy decision.
The problem is that the more competition we have for (2), the less functional any of the competitors are in serving (2).
Given that when Github goes down, a lot of tools and development workflows also go down, I can understand there being a backup repository. But that's not the same as serving purpose (2), that's just redundancy for (1).
The same problem exists for Facebook. The more Facebooks there are, the less functional any Facebook is.
While this is true, especially for open source projects. I'd rather see a healthy open source community on top of an open source platform than a proprietary one. This for two reasons:
1. Suppose that some features are needed by an open source community. In the case of GitHub, you have to ask and wait until they throw something over the wall. In the case of GitLab, you can write the code yourself, submit a pull request. With a bit of luck, it's in the next version of GitLab.
2. Suppose that GitHub or GitLab as a company becomes evil. This is not far-fetched, look at SourceForge. With GitLab, you could fork the latest community edition and have pretty much the same functionality.
GitHub has the community, and I'd personally not like to see that divided, not to mention the interface is just so much easier to use - GitLab's is mildly infuriating.
It's probably not a coincidence, as Gitlab used to be Utrecht-based if I recall correctly.
Just want to thank you guys for not having to use SVN for my graduate project.
A little bit of stalking shows me we're actually in a class together, see you on Monday ;)
Travis on the other hand... could use a bit of work :)
It only works with GitLab repo's but on GitLab.com you can use the mirror external repositories feature http://doc.gitlab.com/ee/workflow/repository_mirroring.html
I guess I could make some public, but not open source, but that seems like an odd solution too. And I don't want to be publishing homework assignments for others.
Our aim was to provide an at the glance view of the development status (# of commits, branches, pull requests and their status, builds and deployments) with the option to see more detailed information right within JIRA. And of course you can create a new branch right from your JIRA issue.
Lastly, ensuring that the data is 100% reliable and up to date was an important consideration which most of the basic webhook integrations simply ignore.
Take a look at the documentation, which provides a great overview of the integration: https://confluence.atlassian.com/jira/viewing-the-code-devel...
One thing I've really wanted was a voting system -> merge. Is there a way to require X amount of votes (in general or from specific in a specific group) which, once that is hit, allows the PR to be merged into master? Part of our typical code review workflow is requiring a specific amount of people to approve the PR before it goes in but it's basically the honor system right now and it would be really cool to turn that into some sort of rule.
From my perspective the best thing would be for them to eventually open source some features I'd like to have in an open source project hosting service, once they've made more reasons for people to pay them. The worst thing would be if someone added it in a plugin or fork of GitLab CE and the company GitLab were to claim that they must have looked at the GitLab EE source code. GitLab Pages and audit logs are the features I'd most like to see in the open source version.
This is much like Nginx Plus's improved load balancing with health checks, which has me considering Tengine.
We do try to open source features that are requested by open source projects, such as the branded login page after a HN discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10931690
I agree that falsely accusing people of looking at the EE code would be very bad. So far we only once declined a contribution to CE by claiming it was EE code, in this case the code was verbatim, the diff showed a zero character difference. Future calls will be harder but we'll try to prevent false declines.
More about this our criteria to merge CE contributions if they are already in EE can be found in https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship
Personally, I much prefer Gitlabs project -> code / issues / milestones / etc workflow over Phabricator's git / issues milestones -> projects workflow, and love using Gitlab, but there are a lot of free software communities (Gnome, Freedesktop.org, among others) who are almost certainly going to try moving to more modern project management services in the near future and will be forced away from the IMO best UX Gitlab offers for ones like gogs / phabricator that both sate their needs for a free software solution that also has the featureset for these thousand+ developer ecosystems.
They don't have the cool hipster vibe that github has, github earned their street cred. A copy cat will always be a copy cat.
All these features ppl are asking for are against the ethos of github. Can somone give github props for well implemented git lfs.
sorry gitlab guy who is watching this thread if that was too harsh.
HN is ycombinator trojan horse for HN startups with full censorship of articles critical of their startups. Yet you are here aren't you?
It has more features than Gitlab, anyway.
I'm reading the landing page, but the terribly self-deprecating style makes it hard to find the actual pain-point solutions buried within.
This gives has all their documentation, applications, and handy nearby search to find answers to the questions you may be thinking about while checking out each application.
From what I understand, the real value that you are selling with an enterprise edition is the support, dedicated staff, monitoring services and training.
The current license https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/blob/master/LICENSE is proprietary but it does allow people to see the code, modify it and contribute patches https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ee/merge_requests
Part of the value of a subscription is our support and training, but the unique features of EE https://about.gitlab.com/features/#compare also are important.
Again, I don't mean to be rude, just curiosity, how would you react if people forked the community edition and implemented some of the enterprise edition features and released it under the MIT expat licence?
If people forked CE to add features of EE we would wonder why we didn't merge those in. For our criteria for merging features that are currently EE only please see https://about.gitlab.com/about/#stewardship
I'm stuck with TFS here, which is a PITA and broken on so many levels, it's not even funny. Running a GitLab front would solve nearly all of my problems while still complying with the dreaded "everything in TFS" policy. :/
I've tried some thing with git-tf but that is too unstable to use (and not validated).
- updated once per hour or manually
Seems as if this would be generally good enough, but some sort of push integration would be awesome
- EE only
The dealbreaker. I understand. It makes sense to feature-gate stuff. But my entirely personal situation is that the company enforces TFS. I (and quite some coworkers) would prefer GitLabs features. But there's just no way for me to ask for a budget. What for? "Replace TFS"? Not gonna happen. A C"C works fine, everyone's convinced that we should go for GitLab only" might work. Perhaps. But that's impossible at the moment, I guess.
2. Thanks for understanding. Please consider emailing sales@ company domain to see if there are possibilities. If you are working for a large organization we can maybe do an extended trial. Please reference this comment in your email.
How would one contribute something to a feature that is EE only? Is that a scenario that you had in the past? How does that work?
We've had customers contribute EE-specific features and changes several times in the past. In one case, CERN contributed improvements to certain EE-exclusive authentication options.
The workflow is identical otherwise.
Albeit, I am little disappointed because I have finally started getting into open source and being active on GitHub, and now it seems the development community is vying for a way out. GitHub may not be open, it may be centralized, but it does offer the advantages of uniformity and easy discovery.
Either way, just signed up. Excited to support Gitlab, any way I can.
But I get your point, GitHub currently is an extension of your resume. Based on a HN discussion we made a feature proposal to combine your GH and GL activity https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/13401
So you are telling me that there is no problem and people should just use a private SSH connection to a box they own?
For it to be open source it must "made available with a license in which the copyright holder provides the rights to study, change, and distribute the software to anyone and for any purpose."
If you publish a github repo with no LICENSE file that specifies an actual open source license it's all rights reserved by default.
Nearly all open source software is free software, but
there are exceptions. First, some open source licenses
are too restrictive, so they do not qualify as free
licenses. For example, “Open Watcom” is nonfree because
its license does not allow making a modified version
and using it privately.
I'm interested in what would be the name for software released on a GitHub public repo, but with all rights reserved?
Now it makes Github look good -- look we have millions of users, billions of lines of code, so many repos. You can see it here it all.
Of course it is important to realize it is free and provided by Github with their infrastructure. So certainly not implying that owe people with free repos anything and if they want those terms of agreement for whatever reason then that's fine.
I just don't necessarily agree that what github is doing is necessarily to benefit "open source" as movement (if there is such a thing).
 Yep, my BitBucket account is basically a graveyard.
On gitlab when most stuff is default-private it leads to a lot of potential collaboration being lost, regardless of license.
Actually light themes work better for me. I have astigmatism and light themes open the pupil allowing me to see the text easier. With a dark theme I basically just see line noise.
This might be a misconception of dark themes.