I'd consider self-hosting GitHub Enterprise before putting my team through the pain of Gitlab.

How is it painful to use GitLab? Curious, as a user of both, I find them both nice. I like GitLab CI/CD more than I do GHA, but that's personal preference/bias more than anything objective.

▲

tux3 an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Gitlab CI has some tech debt from accumulating geological layers of different ways to do things, but overall it's pretty good, it scales to more complicated setups, and it's not too painful.

Now the best way to use GHA is to do the bare minimum. Put all your CI logic in a script that you can test locally, and just have GHA run your script. Even that is painful. And, somehow, impossible to make secure without having spent 5,000 hours reading all the previous ways people got pwn'd by Github Action's horrendous security model.

My main problem with Gitlab is that after years I still can't find what I'm looking for in the UI. It's always exactly in the third place I look. Otherwise Gitlab has been good. Even self-hosted works pretty well.

	▲	dijksterhuis an hour ago \| parent [-]
		expanding on the parent a little * GiLab — Ops centric * GitHub — Developer centric if you just want somewhere to stick a code repo and build a release every so often — dont use gitlab, you will not enjoy it. > My main problem with Gitlab is that after years I still can't find what I'm looking for in the UI. i still get lost too after several years daily driving gitlab. this is the Ops centric thing. they provide a lot of options. lots of options is good for Ops. > Now the best way to use GHA is to do the bare minimum yeah, i’m an ops guy, so the maintaining custom actions stuff on github is horrible for me vs click a button and move on with my day — once i find the button that is! xD

▲

EduardoBautista an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Everything about their UI/UX screams of doing the bare minimum to check off a box on a feature list. It reminds me of Jira.