Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
In general, the foundations upon which it was built.

In specific, off the top of my head:

- you can't group repos

- CI/CD is far behind what GitLab offers

- Review apps (though I think now you can do this on GH with other tools)

- Can't mark PRs as drafts by default in GH

- better metric tracking, easier to see a "snapshot" of where something is at on GitLab

Tbf, GH may have closed some gaps over the years but when I was bouncing between the two GH always felt a lot more rigid and further behind than GL. It did have fantastic support for open source though, and has a few unique and fun things like the `io` site stuff. Overall though if I could choose which to work in for serious projects I'll always choose GL.

> Can't mark PRs as drafts by default in GH

You can choose to create draft prs on the pr creation page and it will default to draft from there on. But this is per user and maybe per repo too. Besides if you’re using llms, you can set it to create draft prs.