GitLab

GitLab has a open-source community and great documentation that provides support resources and community contributions. AWS CodeCommit is used for integration with other AWS services in the AWS ecosystem and also have a low community and support compared to GitLab hence GitLab is used more compared to aws code commit as it has limitation.

It was a management decision to use GitLab over other tools. It integrates well with RBAC using Terraform. Runners are easy to setup. Almost all the features the organization used before are available in GitLab.

For small projects or companies that do work on a few only code repositories selecting one of the git code hosting services like GitLab, GitHub, Bitbicket etc does not make a big difference.

But, if you are on a code development company that handles too many repositories and code hosting is really a big operation cost than you should consider the following in order to choose GitLab.

- Better pricing model
- Better security
- Self hosted
- Open source platform

Software delivery is the key objective and GitLab made it much easier to hit the group quickly. It worked well with automation, and integrations with other SDLC tools used in the Organization and it is really easy to use. It's widely adopted and has the power to deliver what we need.

1. Easier to use and setup then any other product.
2. CI/CD is also easier in GitLab

GitLab's online IDE and code modification is much better compared to Stash. While pricier than Bitbucket, Gitlab also provides CI CD configuration better than BB.

Gitlab was the first product to offer a wide range of features, including private repositories, for free. This is very important for startups that cannot afford to spend an extra dollar.

If you want a comprehensive platform with built-in CI/CD and deployment flexibility, GitLab might be your choice. If you prefer a broader ecosystem and a vibrant developer community, GitHub could be a good fit.

We migrated from Gerrit to GitLab, and minus a few minor bumps during migration, GitLab has been hands down better. Our devs have faster time to code review with notifications, the UI is easy to navigate and, and our pipeline is integrated and automated, so once everything is in place, our merges happen automatically. Gerrit was lacking in the UI, and notifications were hit or miss, so code reviews were delayed. Our pipeline is much smoother with GitLab.

Gitlab provided on par functionality and it provided a good option for us to self host which is very important for our business. We think the business continuity story is more solid with Gitlab.

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 GitKraken, 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

Actually there is no big difference between them it was a choice by our architects and i think its more professional tool than GitHub that is community

vs. AWS CodeCommit: As an AWS-centered organization, our teams have used AWS CodeCommit, the AWS native services that competes against GitLab. GitLab stacks better than CodeCommit even for development and CI/CD in the AWS ecosystem. It is more user-friendly, better version control, and a generally better CI/CD nature.

vs. GitHub: Comparable, I personally consider both of these products equally as good.

GitLab fits our needs much better because it is a all-in-one solution and is easier to learn. We have a wide range of users - senior software developers and people who only write small, easy scripts or just start pipelines. Jenkins is rather useful when e.g. more fine-grained control over pipelines is required. Also the collaboration features of GitLab are really good and intuitive and one of the most needed use cases in our company.

GitLab is easy to access either from Linux or Windows tools. Better control from CMS or Linus shell. Better & Easy understanding of UIs even for freshers. Fast CLI executions & Better support forums in case of issues.

We are coming from Bitbucket, and we switch to Gitlab to improve the source code management and the reading, which is better on Gitlab. The Merge request flow is also better than Bitbucket. This allows us to use Gitlab CI, which is well-integrated. Compared to GitHub, it is available in a self-managed instance, so we have full control, but it can be harder to configure.

More friendly interface and very intuitive.

Although GitLab lacks some indexing service but it is well suited for big enterprises users for version control and ci/ cd pipeline. The user interface of GitHub is much better than GitLab. The search functionality of GitLab is far better than GitHub along multiple projects. The documentation part wiki is also useful in GitLab.

GitLab is a great competitor!

GitLab was already in use when I joined my current company.

GitHub seems more evolved now and GitLab is falling behind in terms of the features and the ecosystem, in my opinion.

We selected Gitlab for something I mentioned in the review: There is a huge community and support structure for Gitlab. It allowed us to learn the software a little easier, knowing that what we perceived as hurdles were being experience with others as well, but they worked to a resolution. We felt that the other software of that ilk could not hold a candle.

Other solutions were studied, however GitHub being a SaaS solution causes security issues whithin many organizations.
Bitbucket on the other hand can be installed and maintained however it must require licensing purchases.
Although GitLab free version doesn't provide a lot of features (example : specific roles and restrictions) it still a great starting solution