Git Flow vs GitLab

Overview

GitLab

Stacks63.4K

Followers54.5K

Votes2.5K

GitHub Stars0

Forks0

Git Flow

Stacks91

Followers76

Votes0

GitHub Stars2.5K

Forks627

Git Flow vs GitLab: What are the differences?

Introduction

Git Flow and GitLab are both popular tools used in software development projects. While they have some similarities, such as being based on Git, there are also significant differences between them. In this article, we will explore the key differences between Git Flow and GitLab.

Branching Model: Git Flow is a branching model that focuses on managing branches in a software development project. It defines specific branches for different purposes, such as feature, develop, release, and hotfix branches. On the other hand, GitLab is a web-based Git repository management and collaboration platform that provides features beyond just managing the branching model. GitLab allows for a more flexible approach to branching, where developers can create their own branches according to their needs.
Workflow Automation: Git Flow does not provide any built-in workflow automation features. It relies on developers manually creating and merging branches. In contrast, GitLab offers various automation features, such as CI/CD pipelines, which enable developers to automate the build, test, and deployment processes. GitLab's automation capabilities help streamline the development workflow and improve efficiency.
Built-in Issue Tracking and Collaboration: GitLab provides built-in issue tracking and collaboration features, allowing teams to manage their project tasks, track bugs, and collaborate on code effectively. It provides a centralized platform that integrates both code repositories and project management tools. In contrast, Git Flow does not include any built-in issue tracking or collaboration features. Teams using Git Flow typically use external tools for project management and issue tracking.
Merge Request Workflow: GitLab introduces the concept of merge requests, which allows developers to propose code changes and request reviews from their peers. This workflow promotes collaboration and code review, ensuring that changes are thoroughly examined before merging into the main codebase. Git Flow, on the other hand, does not have a built-in merge request workflow. Code changes are typically merged directly into the respective branches without a formal review process.
Built-in Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment (CI/CD): GitLab offers integrated CI/CD capabilities, allowing developers to automate the testing and deployment of their code. By defining pipelines and jobs, developers can ensure that their code is tested, built, and deployed in a controlled and automated manner. Git Flow does not provide any native CI/CD features and relies on external tools for such automation.
Graphical User Interface (GUI) GitLab provides a comprehensive web-based GUI that facilitates visualizing and managing code repositories, issues, merge requests, pipelines, and other project-related tasks in a user-friendly manner. Git Flow, however, is more of a branching model and does not offer a GUI out of the box. Developers primarily interact with Git Flow through the command line interface.

In Summary, Git Flow is primarily a branching model that focuses on branch management, while GitLab is a full-fledged web-based Git repository management and collaboration platform that offers additional features such as automation, issue tracking, merge requests, CI/CD, and a graphical user interface.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on GitLab, Git Flow

Anonymous

May 25, 2020

Decided

Gitlab as A LOT of features that GitHub and Azure DevOps are missing. Even if both GH and Azure are backed by Microsoft, GitLab being open source has a faster upgrade rate and the hosted by gitlab.com solution seems more appealing than anything else! Quick win: the UI is way better and the Pipeline is way easier to setup on GitLab!

624k views624k

Comments

Weverton

CTO at SourceLevel

Jul 28, 2020

Review

Using an inclusive language is crucial for fostering a diverse culture. Git has changed the naming conventions to be more language-inclusive, and so you should change. Our development tools, like GitHub and GitLab, already supports the change.

SourceLevel deals very nicely with repositories that changed the master branch to a more appropriate word. Besides, you can use the grep linter the look for exclusive terms contained in the source code.

As the inclusive language gap may happen in other aspects of our lives, have you already thought about them?

944k views944k

Comments

Weverton

CTO at SourceLevel

Aug 3, 2020

Review

Do you review your Pull/Merge Request before assigning Reviewers?

If you work in a team opening a Pull Request (or Merge Request) looks appropriate. However, have you ever thought about opening a Pull/Merge Request when working by yourself? Here's a checklist of things you can review in your own:

Pick the correct target branch
Make Drafts explicit
Name things properly
Ask help for tools
Remove the noise
Fetch necessary data
Understand Mergeability
Pass the message
Add screenshots
Be found in the future
Comment inline in your changes

Read the blog post for more detailed explanation for each item :D

What else do you review before asking for code review?

1.19M views1.19M

Comments

Detailed Comparison

GitLab	Git Flow
GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers.	It provides excellent command line help and output. It is a merge based solution. It doesn't rebase feature branches.
Manage git repositories with fine grained access controls that keep your code secure;Perform code reviews and enhance collaboration with merge requests;Each project can also have an issue tracker and a wiki;Used by more than 100,000 organizations, GitLab is the most popular solution to manage git repositories on-premises;Completely free and open source (MIT Expat license);Powered by Ruby on Rails	DevOps;
Statistics
GitHub Stars 0	GitHub Stars 2.5K
GitHub Forks 0	GitHub Forks 627
Stacks 63.4K	Stacks 91
Followers 54.5K	Followers 76
Votes 2.5K	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 508 Self hosted 431 Free 339 Has community edition 242 Easy setup 240 Familiar interface Cons 28 Slow ui performance 9 Introduce breaking bugs every release 6 Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting) 2 Built-in Docker Registry 1 Review Apps feature	No community feedback yet

What are some alternatives to GitLab, Git Flow?

GitHub

GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together.

Bitbucket

Bitbucket gives teams one place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private Git repositories. Teams choose Bitbucket because it has a superior Jira integration, built-in CI/CD, & is free for up to 5 users.

RhodeCode

RhodeCode provides centralized control over distributed code repositories. Developers get code review tools and custom APIs that work in Mercurial, Git & SVN. Firms get unified security and user control so that their CTOs can sleep at night

AWS CodeCommit

CodeCommit eliminates the need to operate your own source control system or worry about scaling its infrastructure. You can use CodeCommit to securely store anything from source code to binaries, and it works seamlessly with your existing Git tools.

Gogs

The goal of this project is to make the easiest, fastest and most painless way to set up a self-hosted Git service. With Go, this can be done in independent binary distribution across ALL platforms that Go supports, including Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows.

Gitea

Git with a cup of tea! Painless self-hosted all-in-one software development service, including Git hosting, code review, team collaboration, package registry and CI/CD. It published under the MIT license.

Upsource

Upsource summarizes recent changes in your repository, showing commit messages, authors, quick diffs, links to detailed diff views and associated code reviews. A commit graph helps visualize the history of commits, branches and merges in your repository.

Beanstalk

A single process to commit code, review with the team, and deploy the final result to your customers.

GitBucket

GitBucket provides a Github-like UI and features such as Git repository hosting via HTTP and SSH, repository viewer, issues, wiki and pull request.

BinTray

Bintray offers developers the fastest way to publish and consume OSS software releases. With Bintray's full self-service platform developers have full control over their published software and how it is distributed to the world.

Related Comparisons

Git Flow vs GitLab: What are the differences?

Introduction

Branching Model: Git Flow is a branching model that focuses on managing branches in a software development project. It defines specific branches for different purposes, such as feature, develop, release, and hotfix branches. On the other hand, GitLab is a web-based Git repository management and collaboration platform that provides features beyond just managing the branching model. GitLab allows for a more flexible approach to branching, where developers can create their own branches according to their needs.
Workflow Automation: Git Flow does not provide any built-in workflow automation features. It relies on developers manually creating and merging branches. In contrast, GitLab offers various automation features, such as CI/CD pipelines, which enable developers to automate the build, test, and deployment processes. GitLab's automation capabilities help streamline the development workflow and improve efficiency.
Built-in Issue Tracking and Collaboration: GitLab provides built-in issue tracking and collaboration features, allowing teams to manage their project tasks, track bugs, and collaborate on code effectively. It provides a centralized platform that integrates both code repositories and project management tools. In contrast, Git Flow does not include any built-in issue tracking or collaboration features. Teams using Git Flow typically use external tools for project management and issue tracking.
Merge Request Workflow: GitLab introduces the concept of merge requests, which allows developers to propose code changes and request reviews from their peers. This workflow promotes collaboration and code review, ensuring that changes are thoroughly examined before merging into the main codebase. Git Flow, on the other hand, does not have a built-in merge request workflow. Code changes are typically merged directly into the respective branches without a formal review process.
Built-in Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment (CI/CD): GitLab offers integrated CI/CD capabilities, allowing developers to automate the testing and deployment of their code. By defining pipelines and jobs, developers can ensure that their code is tested, built, and deployed in a controlled and automated manner. Git Flow does not provide any native CI/CD features and relies on external tools for such automation.
Graphical User Interface (GUI) GitLab provides a comprehensive web-based GUI that facilitates visualizing and managing code repositories, issues, merge requests, pipelines, and other project-related tasks in a user-friendly manner. Git Flow, however, is more of a branching model and does not offer a GUI out of the box. Developers primarily interact with Git Flow through the command line interface.

Git Flow vs GitLab

Overview