Gitlab is a scourge - only fools trend At scale Gitlab CI/CD (EE) fails miserably. It’s basically a giant YaML pre-processor the design of which precludes any thing remotely reusable. As far unit testing your pipelines, just forget about it. It tries to hoist YaML on you as a programming language and only supports shell scripts as snippets. Declarative pipelines like in Jenkins, GitHub, and etc is simply not possible in Gitlab pipelines. The UI is server side HTML MVC 1 (Ruby on Rails): I call it archaic, but it would need man decades of work just to accomplish that degree of maturity (it’s not even archaic YET, archaic would be a vast improvement). For example, the HTML tables are fixed and truncate data in its columns AND there is no way to EVER EVEN view the contents in the contents — you must copy and paste into an external editor! While Gitlab appears to quickly bootstrap CI/CD pipelines anything beyond essentially trivial solutions are effectively impractical. The architecture of Gitlab pipelines will leave you with a ton of snowflake pipelines and result in unreliable, unrepeatable, untestable, and un-debuggable Ci/CD system. And the EE system editions costs an arm and leg (premium) or all limbs (enterprise). Avoid gitlab like you would avoid COVID - otherwise it’ll kill you.

Works perfectly I use GitLab both for personal projects using their platform and manage a couple of instance of GitLab for work (3000 users). I've always had a great time with the service, GitLab runners are one of the best things for automation I've ever used.

No help from support -

Poor quality Gitlab Enterprise - Poor quality, Poor SLA turnaround, eye wateringly expensive, buggy. Open source enterprise solutions never make for great products, as result it is full of bugs, is disorganized, suffers from huge conflicts of interests because of its open source nature, too many people contributing conflicting ideas. Over 40,000 unresolved issues, Very slow turn arounds because of chaotic slow build pipelines for the product, simple things take months to resolve including interests falling under SLA. The issue tracker is primitive. This product has Groups and Repos where a Repo is a Project, so you have groups with Many Repos where each is a project therefore all Project related product features are directly tied to a single Repo, this does not make any sense, if you working on a project broken down into modules, I find this repo pivoted setup rather unfriendly to work with. How its done with competitors is that you create a Project, all the product features are tied to that project, all are optional, agnostic of a repo, can have one or many which is much better for structured modularization. The interface is horrible, i find it rather difficult to navigate, scattery options, the analytics features are useless meaningless charts. Pull Request Reviewing inside the product is awful. SAST security scanning does not work very well, been waiting for simple fixes for months so we are unable to meet a regulatory requirements. It is very difficult to configure anything, it takes a long time to figure out how to do anything, the Docs are very wordy, the tell a story instead of getting to the point. Never seem to simple catalog a table of configurable options, in some cases they are but fails to tell you how or where. Permissions are difficult to manage, Token access configuration around groups is problematic for modular production, users need too high a permission set to enable token creation against a Group. There is no native support for Git Flow, so there is no Git Flow workflow UI available. Competitor products offer very easy ways to configure per branch action permissions, for example only allowing users to make a pull request to a certain branch, as far as I can see in GitLab you can only control weather users can make pull requests at all or not, I can't see any obvious way in the UI to scope and permit actions to certain branches.

cool, thank you! High-quality service for updating the site, cool, thank you!!!