We compared GitLab and AWS CodePipeline based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, GitLab is praised for its pricing, version control capabilities, customer service, and project management features, while users suggest improvements in UI, speed, and code review. On the other hand, AWS CodePipeline stands out for its integration with AWS services, ease of use, and automation capabilities. Users appreciate its flexible pricing and excellent customer service but seek enhancements in flexibility, UI, integration, documentation, performance, error handling, and potentially pricing.
Features: In terms of valuable features, GitLab stands out with its robust version control capabilities, seamless collaboration tools, comprehensive issue tracking system, and strong integration with other development tools. On the other hand, AWS CodePipeline is highly appreciated for its seamless integration with other AWS services, ease of use and flexibility in setting up workflows, and excellent scalability and stability.
Pricing and ROI: GitLab's setup cost is reported to be easy and straightforward, offering flexible and convenient licensing options for individuals and businesses. On the other hand, AWS CodePipeline offers simplicity and ease of setup, with fair and transparent licensing terms that suit businesses of different sizes and budgets., GitLab users have reported positive ROI and satisfaction, emphasizing the platform's value and benefits. AWS CodePipeline users have highlighted its integration, automation, and error reduction capabilities, improving workflow efficiency and software quality.
Room for Improvement: GitLab's room for improvement lies in its user interface, navigation, performance, project management features, and code review process. AWS CodePipeline, on the other hand, can enhance its flexibility, user interface, integration capabilities, documentation, performance, error handling, and pricing models.
Deployment and customer support: The user feedback for GitLab indicates a range of timeframes for deployment and setup phases, with some users considering them separate and others considering them the same period. On the other hand, user experiences with AWS CodePipeline vary greatly, with some users requiring three months for deployment and others only a week. Setup times also vary., The customer service of both GitLab and AWS CodePipeline products has been highly praised by users. Users appreciate the prompt assistance and knowledgeable support team of both products. However, GitLab is known for consistently going above and beyond to resolve issues and address concerns, while AWS CodePipeline has been commended for its responsiveness and availability of customer service.
The summary above is based on 57 interviews we conducted recently with GitLab and AWS CodePipeline users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The integrations are good."
"In AWS, the Cloud DevOps is a managed service from CodeCommit and this has removed the need for a lot of manual steps."
"The integration with other applications is fabulous."
"It's a perfect solution if you are just using AWS."
"The most valuable feature of AWS CodePipeline is the flexibility of the configuration."
"I find performance to be the most valuable CodePipeline feature. It works perfectly and smoothly."
"The product is cost-effective and integrates well with the AWS environment."
"The product is a one-stop solution that you can use to integrate, deploy and host your application."
"It is scalable."
"I have found the most valuable feature is security control. I also like the branching and cloning software."
"GitLab is being used as a repository for our codebase and it is a one stop DevOps tool we use in our team."
"I like GitLab from the CI/CD perspective. It is much easier to set up CI/CD and then integrate with other tools."
"GitLab offers a good interface for doing code reviews between two colleagues."
"GitLab's best features are maintenance, branch integration, and development infrastructure."
"GitLab's best feature is Actions."
"We have seen a couple of merge requests or pull requests raised in GitLab. I see the interface, the way it shows the difference between the two source codes, that it is easy for anyone to do the review and then accept the request; the pull request is the valuable feature."
"AWS CodePipeline functions well, but there's room for improvement in providing technical support to regular customers who haven't purchased developer support. I mean, having it available for everyone, even if it's not a 24-hour service. It would be more useful if specific support hours were available for assistance."
"If you're talking about multi-cloud, you can't use it."
"In the next release, I would like to see fewer timeout errors."
"The migration process from one source code to another needs improvement."
"The tool does not provide automated features for evidence collection."
"The solution could improve the documentation. Sometimes we have some issues with the documentation not updating after releasing .NET 6. We had some issues with building the code pipeline, and it was not updating the documentation. It's better to update the code documentation."
"AWS CodePipeline doesn't offer much room for customization."
"If there are many dependancies involved in the setup, it may take a long time."
"As GitLab is not perfect, what needs improvement in the solution is the Wiki feature of the groups or the repertories because currently, it's not searchable by default. You'll need an indexing service such as Elasticsearch to make it searchable, and that requires too much work, so for me, it's the main feature that should be improved in GitLab. In the next version of the solution, from the top of my head, the documentation could be improved. Besides the Wiki, it would be good if there's documentation that would be automatically generated based on the code repository. In other words, there should be some tutorials from GitLab for developers in the next release."
"As a partner, sometimes it's difficult to get support. They have a really complicated procedure for their support."
"We'd like to see better integration with the Atlassian ecosystem."
"I would like more Agile features in the Premium version. The Premium version should have all Agile features that exist in the Ultimate version. IBM AOM has a complete Agile implementation, but in GitLab, you only have these features if you buy the Ultimate version. It would be good if we can use these in the Premium version."
"There was a problem with the build environment when we were looking at developing iOS applications. iOS build require Mac machines and there are no Mac machines provided by GitLab in their cloud. So to build for mobile iOS application, we needed to use our own Mac machine within our own infrastructure. If GitLab were to provide a feature such that an iOS application could also be built through GitLab directly, that would be great."
"GitLab can improve by integrating with more tools, such as servers with Docker."
"The only thing our company is really waiting on in terms of features is the development of metrics."
"There is a need to improve or adopt AI into the ecosystem like a co-pilot, which Microsoft has done with GitHub."
AWS CodePipeline is ranked 3rd in Build Automation with 13 reviews while GitLab is ranked 1st in Build Automation with 70 reviews. AWS CodePipeline is rated 8.4, while GitLab is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of AWS CodePipeline writes "A fully managed service with excellent integrations and a flexible architecture". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". AWS CodePipeline is most compared with AWS CodeStar, Jenkins, GitHub Actions, Tekton and Bamboo, whereas GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, SonarQube, Tekton and TeamCity. See our AWS CodePipeline 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.