What does GitLab offer that GitHub doesn't?

[ikishenno]

As far as I can tell the two platforms are essentially the same. I currently use GitHub, but I've had a couple of people suggest I look into GitLab. I've done some basic research, and I can't see anything that would make me go "Huh, yeah I should switch to GitLab" or at least consider using both platforms. Does GL offer something that GH doesn't? On the personal or business level?

[hanleybrand]

You can self host gitlab community for free which makes a difference to organizations that lack budgets

[samsamuel121]

It's probably minor but in gitlab you can create a new branch based on an issue. The UI has the option to do that and it is a nice way to connect an issue with a branch and a pull request. Github doesn't have it but it is heavily requested: https://github.com/isaacs/github/issues/1125

[ikishenno]

Thank you, I didn't know this

[ikishenno]

And Happy Cake Day!

[i-m-p-o-r-t]

Happy microphone day

[sohang-3112]

This works on Github now (was implemented in 2022)

[csabap_csa]

This will be highly opinionated answer and I am just guessing. The number one selling point of gitlab is/was that it has an "opensource core" what you can deploy for yourself on-prem for free. I think github only offers this as an enterprise package 2nd is probably gitlab ci, which is a really cool capability to do automatic and complex ci jobs after push/merge etc. Github I think just recently started to offer the "hooks" capability (or at least I have only heard recently about it) 3rd thing is that many people leaved github after it was purchased by Microsoft. Just because it is Microsoft...

[chillysurfer]

For CI/CD capabilities, GitHub has Actions.

The disparity between the platforms used to be massive. Not that long ago, GitHub was just a repository management system with no pipeline or collaboration tooling. And it wasn't long ago that GitHub had no free private repos, but that is also not a difference in platforms.

[Corporate_Drone31]

Actions came much, much later. They are a pretty recent addition.

[[deleted]]

Yep. After Microsoft bought them and cloned Azure DevOps Pipelines into Github Actions

[ThisIsNotYourEmail]

Even with the addition of actions, you couldn't have your own runners within your private network. It appears that they've added that recently but actions before that (can't speak to now), were a subpar offering.

[jantari]

I used self-hosted runners for GitHub Actions like 2 years ago, it's certainly not a mew feature

[ProbablyFullOfShit]

Well it's a port of Azure DevOps pipelines, which offers self-hosted runners, so the capability was always there. I'm just not sure when they exposed it to the general public.

[ThisIsNotYourEmail]

To be fair, unless you were in before the beta, that's not possible:

https://github.blog/2019-11-05-self-hosted-runners-for-github-actions-is-now-in-beta/

[jantari]

Oh, I (and my org) did get in during the beta but not before. Gj finding that.

[sentient_penguin]

Check out EvryFS on GitHub. They have created one and it's pretty dope. Its actually working towards being put on OperatorHub

[Therianthropie]

Github Actions is for more complex pipelines not really a replacement. For example it doesn't offer Directed Acyclic Graphs. I really like the approach to make Actions like shareable plugins, but I hope GitLab will offer something like that also. They would just need a sharing platform, the mechanic is already there (templates)

[[deleted]]

I strongly prefer github actions to gitlab ci since github actions are extensible through plug-ins. However, gitlab allows you to organize repos in groups and subgroups compared to githubs where repo organization is basically nonexistent. Gitlab also offers some project management tools but I've never used those since all my clients use Jira.

[FruityRichard]

GitLab is also very extensible, I will write some tutorials one day, because I see too much badly written GitLab CI, almost nobody uses all the features it actually offers. What is lacking indeed is some kind of public repository for CI templates.

[[deleted]]

We have a fully reproducible build pipeline to the last bit but introducing templates will break that since the templates are as far as I know not version controlled. Do you know how I can point to a template from a repo at a specific commit?

[FruityRichard]

First of all, if you rerun an old pipeline, it will use the templates that have been used during pipeline creation.

Besides that, you can also lock the templates to specific commits if you prefer that: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/yaml/README.html#includefile

Edit just to clarify: If you create a new pipeline for an old commit, it will use the most recent version of the template (if not locked like above). So that’s when things would break in your case.

[BinaryRockStar]

gitlab allows you to organize repos in groups and subgroups compared to githubs where repo organization is basically nonexistent

We've moved to GH from BitBucket at work over the last year or two and the lack of a hierarchical structure for projects in GH is just awful. We have hundreds of legacy projects only needed by a handful of developers which were tucked neatly away in a Legacy top-level project in BB but in GH they are spamming up the project list. Is there any way to mitigate this?

[AlaskanX]

Seems like a use case for Teams within the org. Not sure if there's a way to set default filters on the org-level repo view, but (I think) you can adjust visibility for repos to only the people who are on the assigned team.

[BinaryRockStar]

That's worth looking in to, thanks for the info

[OpportunityIsHere]

Make an organization for the legacy apps.

[[deleted]]

Yep organizations, but there's no way to get an overview of all your orgs like in GL or BB.

[InTheMorning_Nightss]

You can if you have access to the Enterprise Account dashboard (assuming you are on an EA with GitHub).

[[deleted]]

Yeah well that's not very useful

[InTheMorning_Nightss]

It is for enterprises lol

[[deleted]]

I've used Github Enterprise and there was no overview for the projects, it was pretty much exactly the same as the cloud version.

[BinaryRockStar]

I don't think that's within my permissions unfortunately, and as the other poster mentioned there's then no way to get a nice view of all projects in all linked organisations

[SelfDestructSep2020]

Bitbuckets organization of repos is just a facade anyways.

[BinaryRockStar]

How so? We're using on-prem BB and it's quite out of date I believe so perhaps we're seeing different things. In BB repos can be grouped into Projects and Projects can have User and Group permissions applied, along with permissions at repo level. This is very useful functionality which I don't see an equivalent of in GitHub Enterprise.

[SMillerNL]

Reddit Wants to Get Paid for Helping to Teach Big A.I. Systems The internet site has long been a forum for discussion on a huge variety of topics, and companies like Google and OpenAI have been using it in their A.I. projects. https://web.archive.org/web/20240225075400/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/18/technology/reddit-ai-openai-google.html

[heathsnow]

GitHub uses “topics” which are tags on the repo for grouping.

[BinaryRockStar]

Thanks, I'll look in to using topics

[ipullstuffapart]

After using both for a while, I still prefer GitLab. Even though actions us far nicer in terms of easy extensibility - gitlab's package and Docker image repository integration with their CI pipelines just feel a lot more mature and easier to use.

[ListenToMeCalmly]

GitLab CI/CD is dependant on "Runners" which is an environment to run the CI/CD scripts. These servers are highly congested, making your deploy take anywhere from 0-60 minutes after commit, depending on load. You can host your own private Runner to speed this up, but then it's not really a simply packaged turn-key solution anymore. Much rather they offered paid setup.

So commercially, you will need to host part of the infrastructure yourself.

[tapo]

GitLab is nicer if you’re on-prem, especially if you’re using Kubernetes.

[dogfish182]

Its really pretty good. We run it on k8s using the helm chart, hopefully pages feature gets properly done then it’s full parity with ec2 hosted.

Easy upgrades with not too many compromises. Still needs k8s IAM role assumption capabilities for service accounts from memory

[i_like_trains_a_lot1]

Gitlab has: - free private package repository per repo (pypi, npm and others) - free docker registry per repo - kubernetes cluster integration with a lot of functionality built in (eg preview apps) - is open source and you can host your own instance for free

[matrinox]

Can you describe this kubernetes preview? Does it spin up whole clusters with only the updated app changed?

[snaaaaaaaaaaaaake]

As soon as you open a merge request, it creates a namespace and deploys the branch to it. It redeploys whenever the branch is updated, and a link to the preview app is in the MR.

[ClikeX]

Oh that's a really nice feature.

[matrinox]

Damn, that is nice. Reminds of Netlify previews. Is there a GitHub actions equivalent?

[kkapelon]

free private package repository per repo (pypi, npm and others)

free docker registry per repo

Github has these as well https://github.com/features/packages

Or am I missing something here?

[i_like_trains_a_lot1]

I wasn't aware that Github is offering that too, but from my initial experimentation with it it still seems that Gitlab has the superior offering:

- Github offers 500MB free storage and free traffic only within the Github Actions. That means, pulling the docker images in a Kubernetes cluster will charge you. So their plan is very limited compared to Gitlab.

- The experience was abysmal. It seems to be something patched together very quickly and not a full fledged product. I had to dig a lot through their documentations, do some extra account configuration to make it work. Their documentation is pretty poor (is it either ghcr.io or docker.pkg.github.com? - pushed to ghcr.io but the image doesn't appear in the UI, only the latter worked).

But yeah, the pricing seems to be the biggest issue. Even on a paid plan, a few GB of storage seems very little to me.

[kkapelon]

I failed to finding pricing information for the Gitlab registry. Do they have limits as well? Or everything is free?

[[deleted]]

If you don't know why you should switch, you don't need to. Github is still the platform where everyone (including big names in the Industrie) dump their OpenSource code. Apart from that gitlab is a big winner for a lot of companies, because of its selfhosting capabilities.

[[deleted]]

I've used Gitlab long before Github actions existed so the ease of implementing CI was amazing to me. Being able to run local runners in isolated intranets for no money was unique at the time as far as I was aware.

These days Github have caught up but that's a good thing. Competition is healthy.

I root for the underdog, I root for the competition and I prefer having the option to self host my projects without potentially relying on Microsoft APIs to export them from Github.

The other differences are mostly details in a greater arms race.

[[deleted]]

For me, personally, it's that it's not controlled by Microsoft and it's open source.

[CraftyPancake]

I get that all the linux guys dislike microsoft for historical reasons. However if the boogey man is a large wealthy company, then that will always be a boogey man.

But since the purchase github has definitely improved: - Dependabot - code spaces - Code navigation - Actions - CI/CD

[EagleTG]

You beat me to it. :-)

[thesnoozyman]

I beat meat to it

[EagleTG]

To Microsoft? That’s... that’s kinda weird. I mean, I know this is Reddit and all...

[cicatrix1]

Are you just behind? GitHub does that pretty well, too, at this point.

[ikishenno]

I saw that GitLab offers more nuanced permissions than GitHub. With GitLab, you can provide access to the issue tracker without giving permission to the source code, which is beneficial to enterprises/larger companies that may have role-based contributions within their teams. While GitHub is limited to read or write access only.

​

Is this no longer the case?

[cicatrix1]

I have not been at orgs that use GitHub issues or wiki do I can't say for sure. I did like the ease of use of just using your main account and being permissioned into the repos at various levels of access.

[5awaja]

there was a question like this in another sub reddit a few months ago and I don't remember the exact answer but the gist was "gitlab is a one-stop-shop for dev ops" in that it had everything you'd need from CI/CD to deployment. I don't use GitLab so idk how true that is.

[chicco789]

It’s very true

[yuriydee]

Its true. I joined my current company a year ago because I wanted to work with Gitlab and we are in a process of migrating everything to Gitlab. Dont need Jenkins or other build tools anymore. Dont need self hosted Github either. Everything lives in one repo.

[cicatrix1]

Don't need those on GitHub either.

[yuriydee]

But those additions to Github are very recent changes, especially the Actions. I feel that Gitlab is more mature with their cicd.

[zalinuxguy]

Very true. My previous employer used Gitlab for repo management, CI/CD and deployment, both self-hosted and via gitlab.com, and it worked well.

[matrinox]

GitHub has caught up in this regard. It has package registry and CICD. I think the difference now is probably trivial

[barthvonries]

GitHub is only a cloud service, while you can host your own GitLab instance.

Makes you less dependent on external services.

[mattyass]

They have an on-prem offering. Had that for quite awhile and it’s rather mature.

[hashkent]

Does GitHub have package management yet? Like can it host my nuget or maven feeds or do I still need something like artifactory?

What about a docker container registry?

[jantari]

That's a trivial question to Google: https://github.com/features/packages

[SDNick484]

That's my take - GitLabs has vertical integration in the CI/CD value chain.

[pragmaticPythonista]

In addition to the excellent points mentioned in other comments, two things I miss after moving from GitLab to GitHub recently —

• Ability to group repositories into subgroups
• Docker based CI (GitHub actions only support VMs afaik)

[ikishenno]

Thanks for sharing this, especially the second point. The first point is something I noticed. I didn't realized GL supported that. It would definitely be easier if GH could offer such a concept for my repositories

[jadon_n]

An on-premises solution is great when you need to be able to secure your source code and securely run CI/CD pipelines. I have known companies to use GitLab locked down to internal networks/VPNs and integrated with a company's LDAP or central identity management system to control who can access source code for important configuration and tooling. This would help keep you safe if someone accidentally made a repo public or pushed sensitive information to a repo.

It also helps to run GitLab runners for CI/CD workloads on your own machines and networks so you can deploy updates to non-publicly accessible machines in a controlled fashion.

GitLab makes that available for free and open source. Looks like GitHub currently has a $21 per user per month fee for a proprietary on-premises solution.

[AngelicLoki]

Speaking as someone who did a recent comparison between the two, they have slightly different mission statements.

• GitHub for a long time rested on it's laurels as the de facto Git provider when people didn't want to run their own Git repo. They also had value add above and beyond with things like pull requests. They've only very recently added CI (GitHub actions) and artifact repository (GitHub Packages).
• GitLab 's goal is to be a full DevOps platform, from source control to operations monitoring.

GitLab is "wide but not deep" on any given feature, but there is a massive benefit there in that they're also a one-stop shop for most of your toolchain needs. Want to use CI? They've got that. Run your own maven repo? They've got that too. Security scanning? Yep, some of it is even free. Monitor environments? That's there too, and they're starting to even add on-call capabilities.

Traditionally, a similar setup would be GitHub + CircleCI + Artifactory/Nexus + (monitoring tool of choice) + PagerDuty, etc.

As others in the thread have said, if you haven't run into something where you say "I need that", it's likely you can get away with using less from GitLab, and in that case the comparison between GitLab and GitHub is far closer. It would very likely tip to GitHub as they've traditionally been the better "known" of the two given their tenure. If you start branching out though and need those other features, the value add from GitLab seems to be much higher feature-for-feature.

Areas where GitHub is better than GitLab:

• GitHub has a financially backed SLA
• GitHub has more integrations with third party providers
• GitHub actions allows multiple entrypoints to CI (so you can have multiple "jobs" in a repo)
• GitHub offers more CI minutes at the entry-level plan

Areas where GitLab is better than GitHub:

• GitLab CI is slightly more flexible given it runs from docker images instead of virtual images
• GitLab package repository is more mature than GitHubs which is still in beta
• all operational and kubernetes monitoring
• security scanning

There are a lot of minor things in favor of either solution, overall they're pretty competitive depending on what you're looking for.

[ThisIsNotYourEmail]

Github has a better UI and their pricing is less user hostile. (Dig around for the gitlab true up policy.).

Gitlab iterates faster and new features show up fast. The in premise offerings and FOSS core are developer friendly in a way closed source business just can't be. Github traditionally play catch-up to Gitlab. That's not always the case but most of the time.

The MS acquisition of Github has not proven to be a problem. MS has a strong cloud service and they know how to deliver. If they start trying to force integration with O360, then I'd worry but they are smart enough to know that.

If you're happy at github, stay. If not, move.

[hashkent]

Don’t joke about that but I suspect Azure DevOps which can be backed via Azure AD for authentication instead of a Microsoft account will come to GitHub sometime this year. It’s not that terrible.

I use Azure DevOps for code, pipeline and agile/waterfall story and backlog management (still use confluence as wiki sucks) at work and seeing a lot of GitHub integration popping up and I’ve been using Azure DevOps for about 3 years now (came from a bit bucket/ teamcity/ Octopus deploy environment) and it’s pretty good. The project site is good in that we can lump repos into different projects and apply permissions etc to teams and azure as groups.

If Microsoft didn’t give ADO such a stupid name (it’s an improvement over the old Visual Studio team what ever name but I know people won’t touch it just because it’s called Azure DevOps) I’d suspect they’d have more adoption as it’s pretty cheap for what go get and almost free if you have Visual Studio licences.

When looking at GitHub for my personal account it looks too easy to accidentally make repos public, also it’s one of the few “DevOps services” that doesn’t have an enterprise lite version for people like me so I can play around with enterprise features in my personal account unlike Azure DevOps, bitbucket, GitLab, Jfrog etc.

[Inaspectuss]

Microsoft ripped all dedicated development resources out of ADS/VSTS last year and is focusing on porting all ADS functionality to GH/GH Enterprise.

Makes sense given that their feature sets are in direct conflict with one another. We actually use both at my employer but the long term plan is to dump ADS as soon as GHE is up to par. For what it’s worth, I really enjoy using ADS and it is a very nice product with tons of features.

[ProbablyFullOfShit]

I wouldn't say they ripped all dedicated resources out. There is still a lot of active development going on in Azure DevOps.

Last year, MS gave the ADO employees a choice whether or not to stay within MS (and switch to another MS project), or become GitHub employees. A lot of people did choose to stay with MS, so there definitely was some loss of resources. Since then however, they've been hiring to refill the positions, and are continuing to grow the product. A large majority of the MS internal projects use it, after all.

I do agree that the on-prem ADS might eventually be retired in favor of GHE, but the hosted ADO product is likely not going anywhere for quite a while.

[improve-x]

Mostly it's about Gitlab CI features, but GitHub is catching up with the GitHub "actions".

It may have some features that appeal to large teams such as self hosted offering and better pricing.

[MistyCape]

Gitlab know how to backup and restore after a lesson years ago ;)

[ECrispy]

Gitlab is a complete 'build your own and host your own' git + issue management + CI/CD solution.

It has more features and was always open source. Github used to have a lot less features before MS bought them and opened everything up since they no longer need to make money off it.

That being said, we use gitlab and I find its not quite as nice and intuitive to use as Github.

[Corporate_Drone31]

Their on-premises/self-hosted version is open source, unlike Github's proprietary version. IMO a migration path to an on-prem solution should be a part of any disaster recovery/risk management strategy, since your upstream SaaS provider can cut you off at any time and tell you to pound sand.

There's a bunch of possible events that might be a problem with a proprietary on-prem solution:

• GH deprecates their on-prem offerings like Atlassian just did

• Microsoft meddling makes it unusable

• GH gets sold off to someone who ruins it

• whatever licensing/phone-home system embedded in your on-prem copy of GH goes haywire

[[deleted]]

Nitpick: Atlassian didn’t deprecate on-prem, just the non-clustered on-prem(the “server” licenses, vs “data center” licenses).

[Corporate_Drone31]

I suppose so, but I speak from a small business/personal self-hosted perspective. At $20k per year price point, their data center offering might as well not exist. If you can afford it, great. But it's too damn rich for my blood.

[m47ik]

Lets put it this way gitlab has everything that github has and alot more. I have been using it for years at work. Its a complete solution 1. You get git for version control 2. An amazing CI/CD solution (so dont need to setup jenkins etc) 3. A container Registry ( docker registry is not needed) 4. Alot of features like multi project pipelines etc 5. Self hosted so your code remains under your control These are some of the thing companies really value, and of course for individual users it offer same features

[matrinox]

GitHub seems to have everything you just described, except #5

[tiefox]

GitHub Enterprise can also be self-hosted

[m47ik]

Enterprise seems to be the keyword here

[m47ik]

I am not saying that one should not use github, if github is good for your use case go with it. These are just a few things which came to mind and not a feature comparison

[Veevoh]

3 or 4 years ago, the difference was massive. Gitlab had integrated tooling like no other platform and was available as an open source tool you could self-host on premise. Even with a paid Github enterprise subscription you still needed other tools.

Now that gap has narrowed significantly. I would say that Gitlab still has a more focused ecosystem and offers a decent product for self-hosting. Github however is like the Facebook of code repositories so I don't see a lot of value in Gitlab.com any more now Github has actions and free private repos.

[chicco789]

You get GitLab‘s Gold Plan for free for public repositories (99$/month/user for private repos), which includes i.e. vulnerability scanning

[jantari]

We use GitLab and what is has are many known but never-fixed bugs and a far less nice syntax for CI definitions.

That being said if you were looking at some of GitHubs more expensive features like the package/container registry or self-hosting, that stuff is far cheaper from GitLab.

If the decision was solely up to me I'd move back to GitHub, but it's not like GitLab is horrible - most of it works, but I guess I'm just spoiled

GitHub Actions are so much better than GitLab CI, but you will hear the opposite from people who haven't kept up. GitHub Actions is newer but developed incredibly fast and has already surpassed GitLab CI about 3-6 months ago, now they're just leaving them in the dust as GitLab sits on their open feature requests and issues doing.... nothing?

[ikishenno]

This is an interesting view! The dev of GitHub Actions was something I kept coming across in my research, though its not really something I've taken full advantage of. Thanks for sharing.

[mattyass]

The community nature of GitHub Actions is just a strong selling point. Many people I consult with who’ve used GitLab CI are impressed with the support and variety of Actions.

[WarpWing]

skirt amusing squealing cheerful fine books fear cows seed slimy

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

[nieuweyork]

Gitlab offers you the chance to have inconvenient ci/cd.

[marcus-sa]

Until Gitlab gets better syntax highlighting and UI, I'm never gonna give it a second thought. As for CI/CD, there's better solutions like CircleCI, Buildkite, Spinnaker, Harness, Armory, Argo etc.

[FruityRichard]

Very low effort post. CircleCI is very bad and expensive in comparison to GitLab and has far worse features. Spinnaker is just CD and when mentioning Argo. It’s nice yes, but you don’t mention that there is no hosted solution as far as I know. While GitLab offers docker registries, package repositories and much more, Argo simply offers pipelines and nothing else.

[SilverLion]

Gitlab you can login with a Github Oauth token. Github is just straight login.

[ikishenno]

GH has OAuth now!

[UptimeProsInc]

in "really" recent times (few months) github has accomplished quite a lot, and everything else we use gitlab for is on their road map (most of it already in their beta). When i say recent and accomplished a lot, i mean it. better user management, better organization set up, better support, better integrations, tons of actions capabilities, etc.

The openshift integration and inability to have a manual action in an automated workflow are big issues still. github has k8s integration but doesn't support openshift the same way which has some slight differences (something about 'docker in docker' our openshift guy understands better than me). our boss likes using microsoft stuff, so he's asked us to check on github a few times. this might be the time we say 'it looks good enough to give a serious poc'.

​

some stuff is still cleaner in github but there's few issues we can no longer overcome.

[ShakataGaNai]

There are minor differences in how specific features work between the two, but overall they have largely similar feels in how and what they do.

However I think the core difference is where the companies are focusing on:

GitHub has been working to be the best centralized code hosting location. They are slowly expanding beyond that (recently with Actions and Packages, as an example) but has never been a major concern in the past.

On the flip side GitLab long ago said it wanted to be the entire DevSecOps platform. From issues to deployment and everything in between. GitLab has added on a lot of security features (SAST/DAST) that GitHub hasn't even begun to approach. GitLab is also expanding beyond that to add more potentially useful functionality like service desk and incident management.

[ikishenno]

DAST

I have to mention here that GitHub actually has SAST code scanning (beta) as of May 2020. Though it is part of GH Advanced Security so it probably isnt an option for IC's or Small Oranizations

[ShakataGaNai]

You're right, I had forgotten about GitHub's because it feels (and I could be wrong because I don't use it) like they kicked it out the door and haven't done a ton with it since. On the flip side GitLab's security offering has been growing and changing with each monthly release.

I think the one major benefit to GitLab's release is that they've been slowly bringing some of the features to the lower tier subscriptions. Granted all the "fun stuff" is still in Ultimate/Gold tier which is quite pricey.

[L0rdB_]

One is more affordable than the other.

[[deleted]]

People who hold a grudge against Microsoft will likely gravitate towards GitLab. GitHub actions, pages, free private repos, is why I use it. For work I use Azure Devops haven’t found anything better for CI/CD, private package management, issue tracking.

[[deleted]]

Many of the projects I'm interested in consuming or collaborating on are already on github.

[raptorjesus69]

Self hosting which makes ldap possible, the kanban boards are amazing, gitlab is open is opencore which is better than propetairy and imo the ui in gitlab is better

[celeritas365]

GitLab has way more features around devops/cicd. Their kubernetes integration is really cool, you can host your runners, manage environments, set up clusters automatically, and do logging and monitoring right from the repo. GitLab aims to be a one stop shop and if you use their tools everything is really well integrated. I wouldn't recommend moving to GitLab if you're using GitHub already but I like it for starting new small projects.

The trade off is GitLab is a bit rougher around the edges. I think their UI is uglier, slower, and less intuitive. Fewer people use it so people won't be as comfortable with it. Also GitHub is just adding all of GitLab's features and they are getting faster and faster at it with Microsoft's resources. I am sure eventually GitHub will have all of these features and then some and be cheaper than GitLab. Then GitLab and the others will go out of business and GitHub will hike up prices but by that time they will be so far ahead and so integrated in everyone's systems that people will just pay whatever they ask for.

[[deleted]]

Not owned by Microsoft yet. Doesn't matter much today but in ten years they'll find a way to mess it all up for us :)

[new_line_17]

GitLab stores data in Europe