BuildMaster vs Jenkins

Overview

Jenkins

Stacks59.2K

Followers50.4K

Votes2.2K

GitHub Stars24.6K

Forks9.2K

BuildMaster

Stacks6

Followers7

Votes0

BuildMaster vs Jenkins: What are the differences?

Integration Abilities: BuildMaster provides seamless integration with various tools and systems, making it easier to automate and manage the software delivery process. On the other hand, Jenkins also offers integration capabilities but mainly focuses on continuous integration and deployment tasks, lacking the extensive integrations provided by BuildMaster.
User Interface: BuildMaster is known for its user-friendly and intuitive interface, which simplifies the configuration and management of the deployment pipeline. In contrast, Jenkins has a more complex and cluttered interface that may require a steeper learning curve for new users.
Workflow Orchestration: BuildMaster emphasizes on workflow orchestration, allowing users to define and automate complex release processes with ease. Jenkins, while capable of handling workflows, may require additional plugins and configuration to achieve the same level of orchestration as BuildMaster.
Security Configuration: BuildMaster offers robust security configuration options, including role-based access control and permissions management, ensuring secure software delivery processes. Jenkins also provides security features, but users often need to rely on plugins and additional configurations to achieve the desired level of security.
Support and Documentation: BuildMaster comes with comprehensive documentation and dedicated support channels, offering users assistance and resources for effectively utilizing the platform. Jenkins, being an open-source tool, relies heavily on community support, which may not always be as readily available or reliable as a paid support model like BuildMaster's.
Cost: BuildMaster is a commercial tool with a licensing fee, providing additional features and support for enterprise users. Jenkins, being open-source, is free to use but may require investment in plugins, additional resources, and maintenance to meet the same level of functionality and support as BuildMaster.

In Summary, BuildMaster excels in integration abilities, user interface, workflow orchestration, security configuration, support, and documentation, whereas Jenkins is more cost-effective but may require additional setup and maintenance efforts to achieve similar capabilities.

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 Jenkins, BuildMaster

Balaramesh

Apr 20, 2020

Needs adviceon

Azure Pipelines

.NET

Jenkins

We are currently using Azure Pipelines for continous integration. Our applications are developed witn .NET framework. But when we look at the online Jenkins is the most widely used tool for continous integration. Can you please give me the advice which one is best to use for my case Azure pipeline or jenkins.

663k views663k

Comments

StackShare

Apr 17, 2019

Needs advice

From a StackShare Community member: "Currently we use Travis CI and have optimized it as much as we can so our builds are fairly quick. Our boss is all about redundancy so we are looking for another solution to fall back on in case Travis goes down and/or jacks prices way up (they were recently acquired). Could someone recommend which CI we should go with and if they have time, an explanation of how they're different?"

530k views530k

Comments

Tatiana

Nov 16, 2019

Decided

Jenkins is a pretty flexible, complete tool. Especially I love the possibility to configure jobs as a code with Jenkins pipelines.

CircleCI is well suited for small projects where the main task is to run continuous integration as quickly as possible. Travis CI is recommended primarily for open-source projects that need to be tested in different environments.

And for something a bit larger I prefer to use Jenkins because it is possible to make serious system configuration thereby different plugins. In Jenkins, I can change almost anything. But if you want to start the CI chain as soon as possible, Jenkins may not be the right choice.

734k views734k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Jenkins	BuildMaster
In a nutshell Jenkins CI is the leading open-source continuous integration server. Built with Java, it provides over 300 plugins to support building and testing virtually any project.	It is a fully-functional Continuous Integration tool for a variety of platforms allowing your organization to start using CI/CD today, even with legacy applications. It runs automated testing for your applications and notify key team members if those tests fail.
Easy installation;Easy configuration;Change set support;Permanent links;RSS/E-mail/IM Integration;After-the-fact tagging;JUnit/TestNG test reporting;Distributed builds;File fingerprinting;Plugin Support	Static Analysis & Reporting; Automated UI Tests;
Statistics
GitHub Stars 24.6K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 9.2K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 59.2K	Stacks 6
Followers 50.4K	Followers 7
Votes 2.2K	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 523 Hosted internally 469 Free open source 318 Great to build, deploy or launch anything async 243 Tons of integrations 211 Rich set of plugins with good documentation Cons 13 Workarounds needed for basic requirements 10 Groovy with cumbersome syntax 8 Plugins compatibility issues 7 Lack of support 7 Limited abilities with declarative pipelines	No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available	Node.js .NET Java

What are some alternatives to Jenkins, BuildMaster?

Travis CI

Free for open source projects, our CI environment provides multiple runtimes (e.g. Node.js or PHP versions), data stores and so on. Because of this, hosting your project on travis-ci.com means you can effortlessly test your library or applications against multiple runtimes and data stores without even having all of them installed locally.

Codeship

Codeship runs your automated tests and configured deployment when you push to your repository. It takes care of managing and scaling the infrastructure so that you are able to test and release more frequently and get faster feedback for building the product your users need.

CircleCI

Continuous integration and delivery platform helps software teams rapidly release code with confidence by automating the build, test, and deploy process. Offers a modern software development platform that lets teams ramp.

TeamCity

TeamCity is a user-friendly continuous integration (CI) server for professional developers, build engineers, and DevOps. It is trivial to setup and absolutely free for small teams and open source projects.

Drone.io

Drone is a hosted continuous integration service. It enables you to conveniently set up projects to automatically build, test, and deploy as you make changes to your code. Drone integrates seamlessly with Github, Bitbucket and Google Code as well as third party services such as Heroku, Dotcloud, Google AppEngine and more.

wercker

Wercker is a CI/CD developer automation platform designed for Microservices & Container Architecture.

GoCD

GoCD is an open source continuous delivery server created by ThoughtWorks. GoCD offers business a first-class build and deployment engine for complete control and visibility.

Shippable

Shippable is a SaaS platform that lets you easily add Continuous Integration/Deployment to your Github and BitBucket repositories. It is lightweight, super simple to setup, and runs your builds and tests faster than any other service.

Buildkite

CI and build automation tool that combines the power of your own build infrastructure with the convenience of a managed, centralized web UI. Used by Shopify, Basecamp, Digital Ocean, Venmo, Cochlear, Bugsnag and more.

Snap CI

Snap CI is a cloud-based continuous integration & continuous deployment tool with powerful deployment pipelines. Integrates seamlessly with GitHub and provides fast feedback so you can deploy with ease.

Related Comparisons

BuildMaster vs Jenkins: What are the differences?

Integration Abilities: BuildMaster provides seamless integration with various tools and systems, making it easier to automate and manage the software delivery process. On the other hand, Jenkins also offers integration capabilities but mainly focuses on continuous integration and deployment tasks, lacking the extensive integrations provided by BuildMaster.
User Interface: BuildMaster is known for its user-friendly and intuitive interface, which simplifies the configuration and management of the deployment pipeline. In contrast, Jenkins has a more complex and cluttered interface that may require a steeper learning curve for new users.
Workflow Orchestration: BuildMaster emphasizes on workflow orchestration, allowing users to define and automate complex release processes with ease. Jenkins, while capable of handling workflows, may require additional plugins and configuration to achieve the same level of orchestration as BuildMaster.
Security Configuration: BuildMaster offers robust security configuration options, including role-based access control and permissions management, ensuring secure software delivery processes. Jenkins also provides security features, but users often need to rely on plugins and additional configurations to achieve the desired level of security.
Support and Documentation: BuildMaster comes with comprehensive documentation and dedicated support channels, offering users assistance and resources for effectively utilizing the platform. Jenkins, being an open-source tool, relies heavily on community support, which may not always be as readily available or reliable as a paid support model like BuildMaster's.
Cost: BuildMaster is a commercial tool with a licensing fee, providing additional features and support for enterprise users. Jenkins, being open-source, is free to use but may require investment in plugins, additional resources, and maintenance to meet the same level of functionality and support as BuildMaster.

BuildMaster vs Jenkins

Overview