Mine is a perfectly valid criticism. You do nobody any favors by conflating the goal of total feature parity with the general concept of business intelligence, and understanding your direct competitor's key features.

The strawman you float is the complete opposite of what I asked. It simply occurred to me as strange that there are features that meet all of the following requirements:

1. Available on github for quite sometime

2. Long enough in fact to get a dedicated article in their knowledgebase

3. A popular enough feature to possibly gate the entire calculus for users to switch services.

4. Obviously useful feature, as evidenced by the gitlab triage engineer being convinced to add an issue with a single paragraph plea.

5. Gitlab is seemingly unaware of this publicly available information, to the trivially rectified detriment of their own bottom line.