Comment by merb | Hacker News Reader

Comment by merb | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

I used both. While Atlassian didn't included everything by default and misses lots of features (due to their plugin system which means that they don't necessary think they need to implement stuff) and Atlassian uses more resource and does not support git:// urls only the ugly ssh:// once. If I think back I should've never switched from Jira+Stash+Jenkins, however we did the Switch to GitLab and somehow I'm not 100% happy. It's way way slower a lot of things in CE are just missing and the costs for our < 10 user company would be way higher with gitlab ee. gitlab is easy to upgrade and the maintance feels a little bit more easy since jira/stash backup is way more complicated. however the jira is way better at managing issues (even the lightweight version of the boards is more simple and easier to use) and stash is extremly fast compared to anything on gitlab. at the end everything has their tradeoffs, but I would prefer the Atlassian Stack since it never broke anything, while on GitLab we often run into issues (especially CI related)

I don't think I've ever seen "ssh://" is ugly, "git://" is beautiful as an argument for/against a git server package before.

Thanks for the feedback.

What do you need in GitLab to manage issues better?

Sorry to hear you ran into problems with your self hosted GitLab. What CI problem was the most disruptive?

Well to not write a wall of text, this were the most "disruptive" things: - compared to JIRA Agile the issue board is a joke (it's hard to actually describe the differences, but basically we can't use the gitlab issue board since it either doesn't work correctly when closing issues via push or it just isn't as understandable as the jira versions) - docker and the ci is a horrible experience (we had a jenkins build before, which always worked, however even the ssh way of gitlab ci sometimes fails randomly or can't be canceled or whatever)

Positive thinks about gitlab: - your at least listening (while atlassian is not, they mostly care for their big customers) however stability and performance should be your number one priority and not adding more stuff that might make that stuff worse. sometimes it's good to not add more stuff in some versions.

Hiya,

Thanks for sharing this feedback.

* Closing issues via push

Automatic issue closing (e.g. via push or MR) should work (I just tried it out on a test repo) - see the docs[1]. Did you use the correct keyword? Maybe something went awry, but it's definitely supported. Or did I misunderstand you and closing them via push works, but the issue is something related to the issue board instead? Could you share a bit more info? We'd love to get that sorted out if it's a bug or problem.

* Issue Board usability

We'd like to make the issue board as best as it can be. Which part of it was confusing to you? Maybe we can open an issue about it and ping the UX team?

* CI

Could you detail the experiences you had with our CI? Were you using GitLab.com or a self-hosted instance? And if you were using GitLab.com, were you using your own or our shared runners?

You can definitely cancel jobs, strange that you had problems with it.

What failed in your job?

* Stability & Performance

With each release we're adding stability and performance improvements, see [2]. And as always, our infra team works hard to improve the same on GitLab.com, see [3]

[1] - https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/project/issues/automatic_iss...

[2] - https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/?scope=all&ut...

[3] - https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/infrastructure/issues?scope=al...

> while atlassian is not, they mostly care for their big customers

What do you base that comment on? Love to know how we can improve (beyond the things already listed above)

Scott (Atlassian CEO)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com