They have actually changed the UI from earlier versions, probably to make it look less like github, and it does look very different[1] to github now.

I like the new look (I think it's more usable than github). In particular I find the "Commits"-tab more intuitive for inspecting code across multiple branches, even though I can't exactly put my finger on the reason. On github I often have to double-check which branch I'm looking at, on GitLab it feels more natural to me.

Basically the only UI-change I would make at this point is on the project-homepage. I'd show those tooltips to the right of the filter-buttons (not above) so they don't cover the other buttons while you hover.

[1] http://demo.gitlabhq.com/

Looks pretty similar to GitHub for me http://gitlab.org/screenshots/

Well, of course it still looks similar (albeit not identical). Why should they change perfectly fine visual elements unless they can improve on them?

I see nothing questionable in copying a good layout anyway, as long as you don't try to fool the user into thinking you are the product that you are borrowing from. There is no point reinventing an existing wheel unless you can make it significantly rounder.

Google docs and Open Office look very similar to MS Office... And why should it look different? :)

I don't think they are actually driving any business away from github or I'd be more angry. This seems to fit a niche for people that would like to use github but legally can't put their code online (even in a private repository). It's github for intranets.

Agree though, github deserves all the karma we can throw at it.

GitHub does cater to that niche: https://enterprise.github.com/

However, it starts at $5000 per year and the main group amongst people I've heard using GitLab has been companies not willing to pay that $5000 (but who otherwise would probably go with GitHub - that is, they're 'satisficing' rather than choosing GitLab as such).

Atlassian offer Stash, an enterprise Git product: https://www.atlassian.com/software/stash/overview

It's priced more competitively than Github and you get access to the source code.

We've tried switching from GH Enterprise to Stash (because of the $5000 thing, which pisses me off and makes me feel like I'm being ripped off at the same time!), but it's really "not there yet".

The file browser sucks, the repo management doesn't make sense (repos live in projects, instead of organization/project or person/project), you can't run git via ssh on port 22, no activity stream (so you need to combine it with Fisheye), etc.

The price of Stash is really the price of Stash + Fisheye. At that point you're only looking at $2500, but still. Unfortunately for us, GitHub issue tracking and wiki suck compared to Jira/Confluence. So we run GH Enterprise + JIRA + Confluence. :)

I know of some fairly sizeable clients who are looking at gitlab because they need a github they can modify - github enterprise doesn't include source code does it?

I guess make a bad UI just for difference with github is a worse

Github, as good as they are, aren't the only company doing what they do. Gitorious, Tigris, Bitbucket and Sourceforge (et al.) have all been around a long time. Suggesting Github have had their features "ripped off" is harsh, and more than a bit rude to the other developers.

Also Assembla: https://www.assembla.com/home