StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Continuous Integration
  4. Continuous Integration
  5. CircleCI vs Hudson

CircleCI vs Hudson

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

CircleCI
CircleCI
Stacks14.5K
Followers7.1K
Votes974
Hudson
Hudson
Stacks12
Followers18
Votes0

CircleCI vs Hudson: What are the differences?

Introduction:

CircleCI and Hudson are popular continuous integration and continuous delivery platforms used by developers to automate software development processes. While both platforms serve a similar purpose, they have key differences that set them apart.

  1. Programming Language Support: CircleCI primarily supports GitHub-based projects and is deeply integrated with GitHub's features, whereas Hudson has a more versatile support for various programming languages and version control systems, providing more flexibility to users.

  2. Scalability and Performance: CircleCI is known for its scalability, allowing users to increase resources as needed and efficiently handle large projects. On the other hand, Hudson may face performance issues when dealing with complex or extensive projects due to its architecture limitations.

  3. User Interface and Ease of Use: CircleCI offers a modern and user-friendly interface, making it easy for both beginners and experienced users to navigate and configure their projects. Hudson, although functional, has a slightly outdated interface that may require more effort for users to understand and utilize effectively.

  4. Integration with Third-Party Tools: CircleCI provides seamless integration with a wide range of third-party tools and services, allowing users to extend the platform's functionality. In comparison, Hudson has a more limited set of integrations, which may require users to rely on custom plugins or workarounds.

  5. Community Support and Updates: CircleCI has a vibrant community and frequently releases updates and new features to improve user experience and address feedback. Hudson, on the other hand, has seen a decline in community support and updates in recent years, potentially leading to compatibility issues and lack of innovation.

  6. Pricing and Licensing: CircleCI offers a tiered pricing model based on usage and additional features, providing users with flexibility to choose the plan that best fits their needs and budget. Hudson, being an open-source platform, is free to use but may require users to invest more time in setup and maintenance compared to a paid solution like CircleCI.

In Summary, CircleCI and Hudson differ in terms of programming language support, scalability, user interface, integration capabilities, community support, and pricing models. Each platform has its strengths and weaknesses, catering to different preferences and requirements of developers.

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)
or
Manual

Advice on CircleCI, Hudson

Dustin
Dustin

Senior Developer at Elegant Themes

Apr 18, 2019

ReviewonCircleCICircleCI

We use CircleCI because of the better value it provides in its plans. I'm sure we could have used Travis just as easily but we found CircleCI's pricing to be more reasonable. In the two years since we signed up, the service has improved. CircleCI is always innovating and iterating on their platform. We have been very satisfied.

607k views607k
Comments
Somnath
Somnath

Engineering Leader at Altimetrik Corp.

Jun 25, 2020

Needs adviceonCircleCICircleCIDrone.ioDrone.ioGitHub ActionsGitHub Actions

I am in the process of evaluating CircleCI, Drone.io, and GitHub Actions to cover my #CI/ #CD needs. I would appreciate your advice on comparative study w.r.t. attributes like language-Inclusive support, code-base integration, performance, cost, maintenance, support, ease of use, ability to deal with big projects, etc. based on actual industry experience.

Thanks in advance!

1.82M views1.82M
Comments
Felipe
Felipe

May 24, 2020

Needs advice

My website is brand new and one of the few requirements of testings I had to implement was code coverage. Never though it was so hard to implement using a #docker container.
Given my lack of experience, every attempt I tried on making a simple code coverage test using the 4 combinations of #TravisCI, #CircleCi with #Coveralls, #Codecov I failed. The main problem was I was generating the .coverage file within the docker container and couldn't access it with #TravisCi or #CircleCi, every attempt to solve this problem seems to be very hacky and this was not the kind of complexity I want to introduce to my newborn website.
This problem was solved using a specific action for #GitHubActions, it was a 3 line solution I had to put in my github workflow file and I was able to access the .coverage file from my docker container and get the coverage report with #Codecov.

198k views198k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

CircleCI
CircleCI
Hudson
Hudson

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.

It monitors the execution of repeated jobs, such as building a software project or jobs run by cron. Among those things, currently it focuses on the two jobs

Language-Inclusive Support;Custom Environments;Flexible Resource Allocation;SSH Or Local Builds For Easy Debugging;Improved Caching;Unmatched Security;Parallelism;Insights
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
Statistics
Stacks
14.5K
Stacks
12
Followers
7.1K
Followers
18
Votes
974
Votes
0
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 226
    Github integration
  • 177
    Easy setup
  • 153
    Fast builds
  • 94
    Competitively priced
  • 74
    Slack integration
Cons
  • 12
    Unstable
  • 6
    Scammy pricing structure
  • 0
    Aggressive Github permissions
No community feedback yet
Integrations
dotCloud
dotCloud
GitHub
GitHub
Xcode
Xcode
Azure Container Service
Azure Container Service
Slack
Slack
Heroku
Heroku
JavaScript
JavaScript
Node.js
Node.js
Python
Python
Amazon EC2
Amazon EC2
JavaScript
JavaScript
Java
Java
HTML5
HTML5

What are some alternatives to CircleCI, Hudson?

Jenkins

Jenkins

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.

Travis CI

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

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.

TeamCity

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.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

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

GoCD

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

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

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

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

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana