Likelihood to Recommend
GIT is good to be used for faster and high availability operations during code release cycle. Git provides a complete replica of the repository on the developer's local system which is why every developer will have complete repository available for quick access on his system and they can merge the specific branches that they have worked on back to the centralized repository. The limitations with GIT are seen when checking in large files.
Read full review
We started to use GitLab for hosting git source code repositories of our projects only but slowly we started to use it to store container images, packages, dependency proxy as well infrastucture registry and it is now well suited for Continuous Integration in our projects, It wasn't that good in Continuous Deployment before 12.0 version but after 12.0 it is amazingly good for Continuous Deployment as well since it keeps deployment information in a well organized manner which can be configure in ci yaml configuration.
Read full review Pros Ability to create branches off current releases to modify code that can be tested in a separate environment. Each developer had their own local copy of branches so it minimizes mistakes being made. Has a user-friendly UI called Git Gui that users can use if they do not like using the command line. Conflicts are displayed nicely so that developers can resolve with ease. Read full review GitLab excels in managing code versions, allowing easy tracking of changes, branch management, and merging contributions. It helps maintain code stability and reliability, saving time and effort in the development or research workflow. Powerful code review features, enabling collaboration and feedback among team members. Robust project management features, including issue tracking, kanban boards, and milestones. Read full review Cons There can be quite a number of commands once you get to the advanced features and functionality of Git. Takes time to master. Doesn't handle static assets (ie: videos, images, etc.) well. Although in the recent years, new functionality has been introduced to address this. Many different GUIs, many people (including myself) opt to just use the command-line. Read full review CI variables management is sometimes hard to use, for example, with File type variables. The scope of each variable is also hard to guess. Access Token: there are too many types (Personal, Project, global..), and it is hard to identify the scope and where it comes from once created. Runners: auto-scaled runners are for the moment hard to put in place, and monitoring is not easy. Read full review Likelihood to Renew
Git has met all standards for a source control tool and even exceeded those standards. Git is so integrated with our work that I can't imagine a day without it.
Read full review
Gitlab is the best in its segment. They have a free version, they have open-source software, they provide a good service with their SaaS product, they are a fully-remote company since the beginning (which means they are fully distributed and have forward-thinking IMO). I would certainly recommend them to everyone.
Read full review Usability
Git is easy to use most of the time. You mostly use a few commands like commiting, fetch/pull, and push which will get you by for most of time.
Read full review
I find it easy to use, I haven't had to do the integration work, so that's why it is a 9/10, cause I can't speak to how easy that part was or the initial set up, but day to day use is great!
Read full review Support Rating
I am not sure what the official Git support channels are like as I have never needed to use any official support. Because Git is so popular among all developers now, it is pretty easy to find the answer to almost any Git question with a quick Google search. I've never had trouble finding what I'm looking for.
Front-End Web Developer, Office of Mediated Education
Read full review
At this point, I do not have much experience with Gitlab support as I have never had to engage them. They have documentation that is helpful, not quite as extensive as other documentation, but helpful nonetheless. They also seem to be relatively responsive on social media platforms (twitter) and really thrived when
was acquired by Microsoft
Read full review Implementation Rating
It's easy to set up and get going.
Read full review Alternatives Considered
I've used both
& Git over the years and have maintained my allegiance to Git. Git is not objectively better than Subversion. It's different.
The key difference is that it is decentralized. With Subversion, you have a problem here: The SVN Repository may be in a location you can't reach (behind a VPN, intranet - etc), you cannot commit. If you want to make a copy of your code, you have to literally copy/paste it. With Git, you do not have this problem. Your local copy is a repository, and you can commit to it and get all benefits of source control. When you regain connectivity to the main repository, you can commit against it. Another thing for consideration is that Git tracks content rather than files. Branches are lightweight and merging is easy, and I mean really easy.
It's distributed, basically every repository is a branch. It's much easier to develop concurrently and collaboratively than with Subversion, in my opinion. It also makes offline development possible. It doesn't impose any workflow, as seen on the above linked website, there are many workflows possible with Git. A Subversion-style workflow is easily mimicked.
Read full review
GitLab is easily the preferred tool when it comes to versioning and source control. With other tools the UI often feels outdated and clunky leading to inefficiency and confusion. With some of the sleeker tools such as
, while the aesthetic is pleasing, the experience is plagued by a lack of support, lack of optional plugins, and a plethora of bugs that cause unnecessary legwork to resolve. GitLab is the best of both aesthetic and functionality
Read full review Return on Investment Git has saved our organization countless hours having to manually trace code to a breaking change or manage conflicting changes. It has no equal when it comes to scalability or manageability. Git has allowed our engineering team to build code reviews into its workflow by preventing a developer from approving or merging in their own code; instead, all proposed changes are reviewed by another engineer to assess the impact of the code and whether or not it should be merged in first. This greatly reduces the likelihood of breaking changes getting into production. Git has at times created some confusion among developers about what to do if they accidentally commit a change they decide later they want to roll back. There are multiple ways to address this problem and the best available option may not be obvious in all cases. Read full review GitLab issue management has made release smoother, with about a factor 2 less time used by the relevant person The outward facing issue desk now has several hundred public issues answered, and thus alleviates the team, as users can refer to older questions Use of CI has made commitment of faulty code drop drastically Read full review ScreenShots