We performed a comparison between GitLab and Harness based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about GitLab, Jenkins, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and others in Build Automation."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."
"It's a great toolbox where the CI/CD pipeline is the fundamental component, but there are so many other features that you can pull from, which makes it a very powerful tool. My current client is using AWS, and they can, of course, use AWS CodePipeline, but GitLab is much more mature than that, and it also gives you the freedom to decide to go to another platform or have a multi-cloud strategy and things like that. That freedom for me is also very valuable."
"The initial setup of GitLab is pretty simple, with no complications."
"The code merging capability is something that we use very frequently."
"The tool helps to integrate CI/CD pipeline deployments. It is very easy to learn. Its security model is good."
"As a developer, this solution is useful as a repository holder because most of the POC projects that we have are on GitLab."
"GitLab's best feature is Actions."
"The solution has an established roadmap that lays out its plans for upgrades over the next two to three years."
"It's a highly customizable DevOps tool."
"It's more related to the supporting layer of features, such as issue management and issue tracking. We tend to always use, for example, Jira next to it. That doesn't mean that GitLab should build something similar to Jira because that will always have its place, but they could grow a bit in those kinds of supporting features. I see some, for example, covering ITSM on a DevOps team level, and that's one of the things that I and my current client would find really helpful. It's understandably not going to be their main focus and their core, and whenever you are with a company that needs a bit more advanced features on that specific topic, you're probably still going to integrate with another tool like Jira Service Management, for example. However, some basic features on things like that could be really helpful."
"The integration could be slightly better."
"I rate the support from GitLab a four out of five."
"Some of the scripts that we encountered in GitLab were not fully functional and threw up errors."
"I would like configuration of a YML file to be done via UI rather than a code file."
"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."
"GitLab's Windows version is yet not available and having this would be an improvement."
"I believe there's room for improvement in the advanced features, particularly in enhancing the pipeline functionalities."
"There's also room for improvement in debugging pipeline issues, which can sometimes become complex."
GitLab is ranked 1st in Build Automation with 70 reviews while Harness is ranked 8th in Build Automation with 1 review. GitLab is rated 8.6, while Harness is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Harness writes "Provides a good graphical interface, but the initial setup process needs improvement ". GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, SonarQube, AWS CodePipeline and Tekton, whereas Harness is most compared with Tekton, Jenkins, Bamboo, TeamCity and AWS CodePipeline.
See our list of best Build Automation vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.