GitLab vs Phabricator: What are the differences?
GitLab: Open source self-hosted Git management software. GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers; Phabricator: Open Source, Software Development Platform. Phabricator is a collection of open source web applications that help software companies build better software.
GitLab and Phabricator are primarily classified as "Code Collaboration & Version Control" and "Code Review" tools respectively.
Some of the features offered by GitLab are:
- Manage git repositories with fine grained access controls that keep your code secure
- Perform code reviews and enhance collaboration with merge requests
- Each project can also have an issue tracker and a wiki
On the other hand, Phabricator provides the following key features:
- reviewing code before it hits master
- auditing code after it hits master
- hosting Git/Hg/SVN repositories
"Self hosted" is the primary reason why developers consider GitLab over the competitors, whereas "Open Source" was stated as the key factor in picking Phabricator.
GitLab is an open source tool with 20.1K GitHub stars and 5.33K GitHub forks. Here's a link to GitLab's open source repository on GitHub.
According to the StackShare community, GitLab has a broader approval, being mentioned in 1219 company stacks & 1431 developers stacks; compared to Phabricator, which is listed in 51 company stacks and 12 developer stacks.
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?
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is GitLab?
What is Phabricator?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
You cannot get easier setup and deployment with GitLab. The documentation is huge and many common use cases are covered. It has a Community Edition (CE, free, 100% open source) and an Enterprise Edittion (EE, see pricing). The CE is more than good enough. Although in the entreprise world, the EE is much better suited if, for instance, LDAP is needed. There is a Web UI that allows people to version their work without too much hassle. If you are a developer and have worked with git before this is really easy.
Als einer der größten Konkurrenten zu GitHub und BitBucket, stellt GitLab eine verlässliche Alternative dar. Als private GitLab Instanz oder als Service bietet GitLab alle Features die wir benötigen und das völlig Kostenfrei in der Community Edition. Hier liegen alle unsere Repositories.
Gitlab offers us a self-hosted replacement for Github and even more than we were expecting from it. All of our code is hosted in our private GitLab-instance, that also hosts our artifacts and is used to deploy them into production.
GitLab is our main Git server, housed on a separate box inside our VPN, it's diverse features and sandbox-support allows it to be an extremely good way to secure your source code.
On Gitlab we host all of our private repositories. We have highly integrated it with other tools like JIRA and Sonar Qube to increase the Code Quality.
GitLab is a web-based Git repository manager with wiki and issue tracking features, using an open source license, developed by GitLab Inc. The software