We performed a comparison between GitHub Actions and GitLab based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Build Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It offers numerous built-in features for pipeline management, release management, and even work item tracking on boards, which makes it a versatile tool that seamlessly integrates with hardware and facilitates optimization."
"I have optimized job execution time by running test scripts in parallel and creating multiple pipelines; we've significantly reduced execution times. What could take 50 minutes can be cut down to just 8 to 10 minutes through these optimizations."
"Creating workflows in YAML format is straightforward and easy to comprehend. This includes both understanding and writing workflows. Additionally, the downloading aspect for third-party instances can also be easily done. It's worth noting that vulnerability analysis and similar tasks should be part of our automation through data workflows. Furthermore, we can break down our processes step by step, starting from building, then moving on to analysis, testing, and finally deploying in production and the clear environment. All of these tasks can be efficiently managed within this platform."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a good product that offers stability and performance."
"The level of automation achievable is really good. So, the custom workflow creation and Marketplace Actions improved our project's efficiency."
"The main benefit is collaboration. It allows us to easily collaborate with other developers, regardless of location. For example, we can collaborate with both our African and German colleagues seamlessly. It's platform-agnostic, so it is flexible and not tied to any OS, so we can work on Linux, Windows, web, and even Oracle applications. It's flexible, reliable, and overall an excellent tool for our needs."
"The stability is good."
"CI/CD and GitLab scanning are the most valuable features."
"The solution makes the CI/CD pipelines easy to execute."
"Their CI/CD engine is very mature. It's very comprehensive and flexible, and compared to other projects, I believe that GitLab is number one right now from that perspective."
"I find the features and version control history to be most valuable for our development workflow. These aspects provide us with a clear view of changes and help us manage requests efficiently."
"CI/CD is very good. The version control system is also good. These are the two features that we use."
"It speeds up our development, it's faster, safer, and more convenient."
"GitLab is very useful for pipelines, continuous integration, and continuous deployment. It is also stable."
"The solution's integration capabilities and UI are areas of concern where improvement is required to make the product more user-friendly."
"The primary area for improvement I see is in artifact management, especially for saving screenshots or videos from failed tests or data-driven actions. Currently, the configuration for saving these artifacts is complex."
"The reporting capabilities are somewhat limited."
"There is a part that detects outdated libraries. If that feature could be more intuitive and informative, that would be nice."
"The UI could be better."
"We can leverage this database tool to manage everything within our environment and data burners, allowing for customization and execution. An additional advantage is the capability to modify aspects like file size, making processes more efficient and faster across the pipelines. Regarding improvements or implementations, I believe there should be enhancements made to the deployment tool. It should be integrated as part of the solution. Infrastructure-wise, we already have tools like GitHub and RobSpot, and data enables us to automate various processes, which is quite beneficial. As for further enhancements, I'm uncertain. I've shared everything I know. However, if there's something specific you'd like to see in future releases, a feature that may not exist yet but would be desirable, I can't provide any input on that matter."
"GitLab could add a plugin to integrate with Kubernetes stuff."
"We'd like to see better integration with the Atlassian ecosystem."
"I don't really like the new Kubernetes integration because it is pretty focused on the on-premise environment, but we're in a hybrid environment."
"I believe there's room for improvement in the advanced features, particularly in enhancing the pipeline functionalities."
"The documentation could be improved to help newcomers better understand things like creating new branches."
"GitLab could consider introducing a code-scanning tool. Purchasing such tools from external markets can incur charges, which might not be favorable. Integrating these features into GitLab would streamline the pipeline and make it more convenient for users."
"Merge conflicts and repository maintenance could improve. If there is someone new to the system they would not know if there is a conflict."
"GitLab doesn't have AWS integration. It would be better to have integration with other container management environments beyond Kubernetes. It has very good integration with Kubernetes, but it doesn't have good integration with, for example, AWS, ETS, etc."
GitHub Actions is ranked 7th in Build Automation with 6 reviews while GitLab is ranked 1st in Build Automation with 70 reviews. GitHub Actions is rated 8.4, while GitLab is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of GitHub Actions writes "Facilitates connectivity for developers and allows us to easily collaborate with other developers, regardless of location". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". GitHub Actions is most compared with Tekton, Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline, TeamCity and Harness, whereas GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, SonarQube, Bamboo, AWS CodePipeline and Tekton. See our GitHub Actions vs. GitLab report.
See our list of best Build Automation vendors.
We monitor all Build Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.