Before folks panic, this is not about requiring test results to pass to merge in a repo, but rather requiring a particular CI job/config to be in all repos on the server.
It's questionable that they are moving this up a tier, but this feature really does seem like it makes the most sense as a compliance feature and all compliance features are 'Ultimate' already. Any other usage seems like it could be replaced by adding an 'include' directive to the relevant jobs.
> One of my customers has concerns with not only losing this specific Premium content but how often this up-tier motion will occurr going forward.
I would coin this "the cost of non-free". Many SaaS contracts are open to bait and switch by exploiting vendor lock-in. Just as gitlab did when they removed a pricing tier a while back.
6 comments
[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 10.1 ms ] threadIt's questionable that they are moving this up a tier, but this feature really does seem like it makes the most sense as a compliance feature and all compliance features are 'Ultimate' already. Any other usage seems like it could be replaced by adding an 'include' directive to the relevant jobs.
I would coin this "the cost of non-free". Many SaaS contracts are open to bait and switch by exploiting vendor lock-in. Just as gitlab did when they removed a pricing tier a while back.
It’s a complete disservice to recommend Gitlab to someone if an alternative is available.
I don’t think either of your statements is true.
In fact, I think that gitlab’s very open development process is a strong reason to recommend them over available alternatives.