Hacker News Reader

Comment by simplehuman | Hacker News Reader

Just wanted to expand a bit more on the knee jerk reaction of suggesting GitLab.com. From what I know from their business, GitLab.com is a loss leader and they make their money primarily from the enterprise self-hosted product. Please keep this in mind because this is important. No service is a charity and GitLab.com will always be their low priority. GitLab.com is not magically immune to problems that GitHub.com faces in terms of license. Once GitLab becomes big, you will see the same things all over.

To conclude, I suspect you are better off just self-hosting GitLab (just pay them license fees). It's really just 3.25 per user per month, please support their self-hosted instance.

View on HN

Hi, Lead FE @ GitLab. When my team and I are developing, we spend a majority of our time, writing code for the community edition (the open source and free version) of GitLab. Also GitLab.com is a priority.

We greatly benefit from all your hard work, so thanks a lot. Can you explain why GitLab.com is a priority though from GitLab's business point of view?

We want to be the platform where everyone can contribute, and that necessarily includes having a great GitLab.com Our strategy [0] page goes into more details there, including our business goals sequence [1] to be the preferred platforms for private repos, then public repos within a few years.

[0]: https://about.gitlab.com/strategy/

[1]: https://about.gitlab.com/strategy/#sequence

Hey, I was just looking over the GitLab product page[0] and it looks like there might be a small issue with the FAQ:

Under the "Can I add more users to my account" faq it indicates that additional users would be billed at 50% upon renewal, while the following question "The True-Up model seems complicated" indicates that additional users would be billed at full price.

I'm not in the market right now, but for people that are this might be a bit confusing.

[0]: https://about.gitlab.com/products/

You can also run the open source version of GitLab on your own hardware for free. Gitea is also quite good if you don't need the more advanced functionality that Gitlab provides - for basic git and issue tracking it's good enough.

If you want to spend money on things and you're a small team also consider Atlassian's JIRA $10 for 10 users plan. JIRA might be overkill for small projects, but if you want nice agile project management tools it's pretty good.

No, don’t use JIRA for developing OSS: https://mako.cc/copyrighteous/free-software-needs-free-tools

I generally agree with the statement, but just throwing other tools around - not necessarily just for open source development.

JIRA isn't much worse than GitLab EE license wise - both will give you their full source under a license that you can't do much with it. The only difference is that part of GitLab is available under a better license, but it's not the version you're running if you run EE.

> You can also run the open source version of GitLab on your own hardware for free.

Why not pay 3-10 bucks to be sure that GitLab stays alive for something so critical as hosting your code?

Depends how much you're relying on it I suppose. For even a small business I'd definitely recommend it, but for my personal usage - eh, I'll use whatever's available.

I'm cheap and I don't personally care that much whether they last so long as there's other options available. I wish them the best, but I'm not going to cry over porting some issues to a different system in the worst case.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com