back
123 comments
This is why we left Gitlab.

DevOps become center part of Gitlab which we don’t use and need any of those feature. We all need a code storage, code review, issue tracking and the CI/CD. We would pay advance features of those (epics, multiple assignee, etc) but we have to pay super expensive top tier which includes unnecessary DevOps stuff. We left and happy so far.

We are using Kubernetes and custom DevOps tools but don’t want to handle things the way that Gitlab does.

This is happening everywhere. The current industry cycle is one of scope expansion, moving away from the do one thing well paradigm. This will lead to bloated software that do a little bit of everything but not very well, which will trigger the next industry cycle, of doing one thing well paradigm.
Yeah this is a really bad direction for gitlab. All of their devops features are terrible. They don’t pay their engineers which is why everything is poorly built.

They should have just focused on being the best vcs. Oh and you get what you pay for. Want to hire a bunch of mediocre engineers? you’ll get a bunch of half baked features

What's the distinction between DevOps and CI/CD? I thought CI/CD is DevOps.
Where did you go instead?
Is it really "center part"? I'll admit there is some unnecessary clutter here and there, but it's easy enough to ignore.

What I don't understand is who these features are for, and who uses them. We use the CI/CD parts, but other than that manage everything through k8s, and I wouldn't dare let GitLab a handle it. And, the whole "one click devops", or what it was called, is even more puzzling.

This is exactly what I am doing for OneDev: https://github.com/theonedev/onedev
I agree with this

so what you guys use for the issue, epics, burndownchart and such?

Old logo was probably the cleverest rendering of a fox using very few lines. The new logo is a lot less smart, much more standard. Typography is also uninspiring: seems to be using Inter, which is designed to not have any character (pun not intended). Although, to be fair, old logo also had very basic typography.
The GitLab logo/mascot is actually a tanuki, a Japanese racoon dog. It symbolizes our values as a smart animal that works in a group to achieve a common goal.
I was never a fan of the almost like gemstone like angularity of the old one. For me the new one does a good job capturing the spirit and the silhouette while just feeling a bit... nicer. I don't really know how else to put it, it just feels a lot more pleasant to look at.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0a/Gitlab_l...

I hope that's the old logo you are talking about. Much smarter than these new ones.

If Inter doesn't have character, then which font has character? How does one pick a font that has character?
Wow you're right, old one is impressive, I like it much more, and to me, it even resembles more a fox than the new one. Never thought about how cool those few lines can represent a fox so well and with personality.

Although I admit the concept and spirit of the new change makes sense.

Old logo for comparison:

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/gitlab-artwork/-/blob/9b07772f...

Bonus:

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/gitlab-artwork/-/blob/9b07772f...

I read the article and still don't understand what the new logo is. Did they just round the sides? Is it the start frame of that animation, with the ∞ symbol?
As much as I love the mustache fox, I struggle with GitLab being at the center of devops. I think source is more powerful to non-devs and hitching everything to devops might present some challenges.

I work with lots of scientists and they don’t care about devops much now and may never need to. But they love GitHub because they collaborate on scripts, manuscripts, demos, small data files, etc. They pay $4/month or whatever and don’t care about devops. There’s lots of people like this.

I think there’s a smaller amount of proper software devs making software that require devops and will pay for devops.

If GitLab is really about devops, then they should be repo agnostic and work with lots of repos. But their core is still source management that they do really well. So their marketing is out of sync with their identity.

I love it.

- I like little quirks in logos like the infinity here.

- It's much more minimal. The old logo had too many unnecessary lines in my opinion.

- I quickly associate the canine appearance and the color orange as a fox so I'm not sure why people are not identifying as one.

- The subtle borders are chef's kiss.

The old logo had a fun little animation when you hovered over it which took advantage of all the lines, seems they did away with it :(
>DevOps Is at the Center of Gitlab

Yeah, just had a call with them and they confirmed that for only VCS its not feasible to use their platform.

What are people migrating to? I am looking at bitbucket again I guess.

Bibucket's code review tools are really bad.

As usual for Atlassian products, every click takes 1-2 seconds.

Finding comments requires manually scrolling. There is a filter function, but it takes some time to load. And even then, there's no way to sort comments chronologically. As a result, we would be constantly missing responses if it wasn't for the email notifications.

If a correction is made through force-push, you'll have no idea what was changed compared to the replaced commit.

The phone interface is unusable. On iPad, scrolling unintentionally adds comments.

There is a VSCode Plugin which is slightly better, but even there we frequently miss comments or changes.

I would probably look back at github (or gitea if self-hosted and you're looking for simplicity), bitbucket is a pile of features that almost work, but you're constantly reminded that you've seem better.

Commit control after PR decline/merge is one of them for me.

I have been following OneDev and seems like it is going to be a good contender.

https://github.com/theonedev/onedev

I work at GitLab, but curious what your use case is for just VCS? I assume your company has other solutions for the software lifecycle that you are happy with?

Depending on the size of your org, If it's small GitLab CE is free and can readily handle VCS no problem, you won't have a support contract though.

What do you mean? Do they just not offer a plan that is cost effective for a source control only use case? I currently use their source control and CI features, and that's it. No issues.
Gitolite is open source and really easy to self host if you only need VCS.
I haven’t used it but I think sr.ht might match your needs.
If you’re not happy with Gitlab, the last thing you want is anything by Atlassian.
I like that it feels more organic (?) and friendly but still recognizable because it is close enough to the previous one.
First time I'm hearing the "DevOps infinity logo", it seems that everything uses a variation of this: Meta, VS Code...
Does this mean I can ewrite a web app, put the source on GitLab and have GitLab run the web app (ideally with very minimal hassle)?

If not, what does it mean? What is Gitlab letting me do now than (a) it didn't do before (b) Github doesn't do?

Ohhhhhhhh it just dawned on me that when GitLab says "DevOps" – they aren't confusingly saying "terraform, etc" type DevOps (Developer/Operations tasks combined), which is actually what everyone else means.

I think they mean "the operations around running a development shop" ... like "Developer Operations."

Silly, but makes so much of their random language about DevOps actually make sense now.

You literally couldn’t pay me to use gitlabs devops tools. They are very poorly built without seemingly any understanding of good practices in the larger ecosystem.

Just be a really great vcs, that would make devs love you. Right now they are playing the atlassian game of checking feature boxes which are all built poorly.

Before I clicked I already knew it would incorporate the horizontal lemniscate... that seems to have become synonymous with devops.

I'm extremely tired of that symbol at this point, I mean there's 4 of those images when I google for "devops" and nothing else: https://i.imgur.com/pr9d8KH.png

Is this a new Firefox service? Hey, I can create a real corporate identity for you. After a serious research and thousands of variants. It is cheap: only 200k USD.:)

Now, a question: Why established IT companies rarely understand the importance of the words "Identity" and "Brand Differentiation"?

Ah gitlab. I tried two whole days to do something, I assumed CI was created for: compiling a binary artifact, and distributing it with some sort of URL where I can always get the latest version.

Guess what: it cannot be done nicely without going back and forth with the API uploading that artifact via curl (?!) from Gitlab to Gitlab etc.

If even such a fundamental thing is not straightforward, I don't want to know about complicated things..

This is a Borland -> Inprise tier shift in marketing.
Subtle change. I enjoy the concept and execution.
Anyone have experience with gitlab's Auto-DevOps stuff? Haven't really had an opportunity to use it (I do use their CI product) but am curious how people who've tried it find it.
Agreed. So much that the git part doesn’t seem to remain a priority anymore.

I use Github for some of our public repos and it feels so much better than Gitlab. It was surprising to see they’ve improved.

So, rounded corners, huh?
My gripe with gitlab is it's absolutely massive, compare to gitea and you miss a few features but you gain the ability for a lowly sysadmin to manage it.
wish I could have cheap gitlab

I mean I don't need all the ci cd but the project management like burn down chart Weighting and such

People hate change, and this one is very incremental. Without the press release I doubt I would've noticed.