Gitlab features that are moving to open source

Since there are GitLab insiders in this thread, a question: has GitLab ever discussed the possibility of simply making Enterprise Edition <i>actually</i> open source&#x2F;free software, all at once, and simply continuing to charge for it like you already do? You can sell free&#x2F;open-source software, and you already offer things like paid support in your pricing model.

Gitlab is really great for companies who wish to self-host their tools, and as a source code repository it is great at the free tier. But for small companies who might wish to migrate their issue tracking to Gitlab as well the pricing of the paid tiers is prohibitively expensive.<p>What would really help me is a self-hosted pricing tier that includes things like epics and roadmap management, for something like $2&#x2F;user&#x2F;month. No need for support, just a way to contribute to the product without breaking the bank. After all, we&#x27;re already self-hosting the software, so without support exceeding that of the free tier it wouldn&#x27;t cost Gitlab a thing, but it would allow smaller companies to support Gitlab financially.

Gitlab CE is just amazing. It&#x27;s hard to fathom going back to GitHub (and I wrote a book for O&#x27;Reilly about the GitHub API). The tight integration with CI rather than using external services is amazing.

Gitlab as both a product and a company continues to amaze me with the quality and value of what they create and give to the community.

I had no idea there were any closed-source features - I thought Gitlab was a passionately completely open-source company. They even open-source their arguments between their legal counsel and their developers!

Bummed that Pull Mirroring isn&#x27;t on the list. I really want to use GitLab for CI&#x2F;CD, but we dont want to store our code there exclusively. Instead we use a series of scripts to work around this problem. Would be great if the core platform just supported this.

I&#x27;m really excited by the availability of the helpdesk feature. It will help our FOSS project reduce the number of mailing lists we have (such as the security@ or some other public-facing lists).

Will these features be available in gitlab.com for free users as well?

Nice set of features! I’m especially excited about the package managers.

Will it be possible to customize these features?<p>I&#x27;d like to turn off Kubernetes integration for example.

That&#x27;s great! Changes I&#x27;d really like to see:<p>Down to starter: epics, roadmaps, HA, Free Guest users Down to premium: SAST, Dependency Scanning, DAST, Vulnerability Management

This is really cool.<p>I just wished they had moved Scoped Labels to Free too.<p>And I would love that the SAST framework goes to Free too and kept have the security scanners Premium. That would allow to have basic code coverage directly in Free, without the complex static analyzers, which would be reserved for premium...

I am a GitLab contributor. I have been fighting for years for them to explain why basic features were getting shoehorned into paid tiers. This is years too late, and it falls short of addressing the source of the issue. The people who are making these decisions seem to have an incentive to restrict features to paid tiers. It&#x27;s a business, I get it, but they are taking basic features that the community could implement, and locking them away in a paid tier. Sometimes a front-end only change, all the data is already available, marked as a paid feature. I used to constantly come across features I needed that had landed in a paid tier where I could write a grease monkey script to do it in a few lines of code, so I would post it as a snippet to illustrate how ridiculous it was.

I am using GitLab in my work environment and I really try to embrace it. But some features one just expects from a basic Jenkins setup are either missing or weirdly implemented and feel like duct-taped into GitLab.<p>Take for example:<p>- Code coverage reports:<p>You can have one absolute number to get your total coverage. To get the number you have to provide a Regex deep down on the main project settings. This Regex has to match some log output of your CI job in order to be picked up, e.g “Total 87%”.<p>Why can’t GitLab collect cobertura Test reports for example?<p>- Unit Test Results:<p>Collecting JUnit test results is disabled by default, since there is a warning about a performance issue when collecting them <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.gitlab.com&#x2F;ee&#x2F;ci&#x2F;junit_test_reports.html#enabling-the-feature" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.gitlab.com&#x2F;ee&#x2F;ci&#x2F;junit_test_reports.html#enabli...</a><p>- collecting multiple artifacts as HTML pages:<p>to circumvent the above downsides, you can get creative, and generate HTML websites of the Unit test and Coverage reports themselves and publish them somewhere. An ideal place would be GitLab pages.<p>But you are only allowed to have one publish job for GitLab Pages. And this publish job has to have a special name so it is recognized for publishing GitLab Pages. The artifacts you want to publish have to be in a special named folder in order to publish them. So you fallback to some hackery by using “mv,mkdir”<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2016&#x2F;04&#x2F;07&#x2F;gitlab-pages-setup&#x2F;#add-gitlab-ci" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;about.gitlab.com&#x2F;blog&#x2F;2016&#x2F;04&#x2F;07&#x2F;gitlab-pages-setup&#x2F;...</a><p>These were some examples which I find not that exotic for a CI setup and I know from previous experience that Jenkins handles all these with ease. To circumvent this shortcoming, we introduced SonarQube.<p>I feel that people often are drawn to a shiny, small GitLab CI yaml and are happy to get started so fast. But again having Jenkinsfiles with shared libraries, which you can program in Java and Groovy, is superior to the next yaml include&#x2F;extend you are going to add.<p>My 2cents are that:<p>If you are a solo developer or a small company Gitlab might be fine for you. When your company is larger and you want to be able to share knowledge using shared libraries, have a streamlined CI setup with GitLab includes from multiple departments, GitLab gets tough.<p>How could one be confident to use for example their 1-click deployment (autodevops) Feature if the implementation of CI basics like collecting test results and coverage reports have this weird taste to it?<p>I wish these features will get better and please don’t take this too harsh. My tone might sound worse than it is.

All not very relevant. They keep the core business features (like merge request approval) carefully out of the OSS edition. And they haven&#x27;t fixed the pricing for their premium offering either.