Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
GitLab vs Gitblit: What are the differences?
Introduction:
GitLab and Gitblit are both software development platforms that provide version control system capabilities. While they serve a similar purpose, there are several key differences between them. In this Markdown document, we will outline six of the main distinctions between GitLab and Gitblit.
Hosting Options: GitLab offers both a cloud-based version (GitLab.com) and a self-hosted version (GitLab CE/EE), giving users the flexibility to choose between a managed service or hosting it on their own infrastructure. On the other hand, Gitblit is primarily designed as a self-hosted solution, which means users have to set up and manage their own Gitblit instance.
User Interface: GitLab provides a more modern and visually appealing user interface, making it more user-friendly and intuitive. It offers a wide range of features accessible through its interface, such as issue tracking, code review, and continuous integration/continuous delivery (CI/CD) pipelines. Gitblit, on the other hand, has a simpler interface that focuses primarily on providing the core functionality of version control.
Integration with External Tools: GitLab has a strong focus on integration and offers seamless connections with various external tools and platforms, such as issue trackers, project management tools, and third-party services. It provides extensive APIs and webhooks to facilitate integration with other systems. Gitblit, while it does support some integrations, may not have the same level of flexibility and breadth of integrations as GitLab.
Built-in CI/CD: GitLab has an integrated CI/CD system, referred to as GitLab CI/CD, which enables users to automate their software delivery pipelines. It provides powerful features such as parallel execution, detailed job logs, and integration with container orchestration platforms like Kubernetes. Gitblit, on the other hand, does not have built-in CI/CD capabilities and requires users to set up separate tools for implementing continuous integration and deployment.
Community and Support: GitLab has a large and active user community, making it easier to find online resources, documentation, and community-driven support. It also benefits from the contributions of its open-source community, leading to frequent updates and improvements. Gitblit, while it does have a user community, may not have the same level of community support and resources as GitLab.
Pricing Model: GitLab offers both a free community edition (GitLab CE) and a paid enterprise edition (GitLab EE) with additional features and support. The enterprise edition is available as a subscription-based licensing model. Gitblit, on the other hand, is an open-source project and is free to use without any licensing costs.
In summary, GitLab provides a more versatile hosting solution with options for both cloud-based and self-hosted instances, a modern user interface with extensive features, and robust integration capabilities. It also offers a built-in CI/CD system and benefits from a large user community. On the other hand, Gitblit is primarily focused on self-hosted instances, has a simpler interface, offers fewer integration options, lacks built-in CI/CD capabilities, and may have a smaller support community.
Both of us are far more familiar with GitHub than Gitlab, and so for our first big project together decided to go with what we know here instead of figuring out something new (there are so many new things we need to figure out, might as well reduce the number of optionally new things, lol). We aren't currently taking advantage of GitHub Actions or very many other built-in features (besides Dependabot) but luckily it integrates very well with the other services we're using.
I first used BitBucket because it had private repo's, and it didn't disappoint me. Also with the smooth integration of Jira, the decision to use BitBucket as a full application maintenance service was as easy as 1, 2, 3.
I honestly love BitBucket, by the looks, by the UI, and the smooth integration with Tower.
Do you review your Pull/Merge Request before assigning Reviewers?
If you work in a team opening a Pull Request (or Merge Request) looks appropriate. However, have you ever thought about opening a Pull/Merge Request when working by yourself? Here's a checklist of things you can review in your own:
- Pick the correct target branch
- Make Drafts explicit
- Name things properly
- Ask help for tools
- Remove the noise
- Fetch necessary data
- Understand Mergeability
- Pass the message
- Add screenshots
- Be found in the future
- Comment inline in your changes
Read the blog post for more detailed explanation for each item :D
What else do you review before asking for code review?
Using an inclusive language is crucial for fostering a diverse culture. Git has changed the naming conventions to be more language-inclusive, and so you should change. Our development tools, like GitHub and GitLab, already supports the change.
SourceLevel deals very nicely with repositories that changed the master branch to a more appropriate word. Besides, you can use the grep linter the look for exclusive terms contained in the source code.
As the inclusive language gap may happen in other aspects of our lives, have you already thought about them?
One of the magic tricks git performs is the ability to rewrite log history. You can do it in many ways, but git rebase -i
is the one I most use. With this command, It’s possible to switch commits order, remove a commit, squash two or more commits, or edit, for instance.
It’s particularly useful to run it before opening a pull request. It allows developers to “clean up” the mess and organize commits before submitting to review. If you follow the practice 3 and 4, then the list of commits should look very similar to a task list. It should reveal the rationale you had, telling the story of how you end up with that final code.
Out of most of the VCS solutions out there, we found Gitlab was the most feature complete with a free community edition. Their DevSecops offering is also a very robust solution. Gitlab CI/CD was quite easy to setup and the direct integration with your VCS + CI/CD is also a bonus. Out of the box integration with major cloud providers, alerting through instant messages etc. are all extremely convenient. We push our CI/CD updates to MS Teams.
Gitlab as A LOT of features that GitHub and Azure DevOps are missing. Even if both GH and Azure are backed by Microsoft, GitLab being open source has a faster upgrade rate and the hosted by gitlab.com solution seems more appealing than anything else! Quick win: the UI is way better and the Pipeline is way easier to setup on GitLab!
At DeployPlace we use self-hosted GitLab, we have chosen GitLab as most of us are familiar with it. We are happy with all features GitLab provides, I can’t imagine our life without integrated GitLab CI. Another important feature for us is integrated code review tool, we use it every day, we use merge requests, code reviews, branching. To be honest, most of us have GitHub accounts as well, we like to contribute in open source, and we want to be a part of the tech community, but lack of solutions from GitHub in the area of CI doesn’t let us chose it for our projects.
Pros of Gitblit
- Fast and fulfill just the features I need1
- Better user & group management1
- Free1
- Easy to setup. Runs on OSX1
- Windows authentication is supported0
- Run on Windows0
Pros of GitLab
- Self hosted508
- Free431
- Has community edition339
- Easy setup242
- Familiar interface240
- Includes many features, including ci137
- Nice UI113
- Good integration with gitlabci84
- Simple setup57
- Has an official mobile app35
- Free private repository34
- Continuous Integration31
- Open source, great ui (like github)23
- Slack Integration18
- Full CI flow15
- Free and unlimited private git repos11
- All in one (Git, CI, Agile..)10
- User, group, and project access management is simple10
- Intuitive UI8
- Built-in CI8
- Full DevOps suite with Git6
- Both public and private Repositories6
- Integrated Docker Registry5
- So easy to use5
- CI5
- Build/pipeline definition alongside code5
- It's powerful source code management tool5
- Dockerized4
- It's fully integrated4
- On-premises4
- Security and Stable4
- Unlimited free repos & collaborators4
- Not Microsoft Owned4
- Excellent4
- Issue system4
- Mattermost Chat client4
- Great for team collaboration3
- Free private repos3
- Because is the best remote host for git repositories3
- Built-in Docker Registry3
- Opensource3
- Low maintenance cost due omnibus-deployment3
- I like the its runners and executors feature3
- Beautiful2
- Groups of groups2
- Multilingual interface2
- Powerful software planning and maintaining tools2
- Review Apps feature2
- Kubernetes integration with GitLab CI2
- One-click install through DigitalOcean2
- Powerful Continuous Integration System2
- It includes everything I need, all packaged with docker2
- The dashboard with deployed environments2
- HipChat intergration2
- Many private repo2
- Kubernetes Integration2
- Published IP list for whitelisting (gl-infra#434)2
- Wounderful2
- Native CI2
- Supports Radius/Ldap & Browser Code Edits1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Gitblit
- Confusing UI2
- Squash and Merge is not supported0
- No active development0
- No code review functionality0
- No Pull Requests0
Cons of GitLab
- Slow ui performance28
- Introduce breaking bugs every release9
- Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting)6
- Built-in Docker Registry2
- Review Apps feature1