Elm Alternatives logo

Elm Alternatives

Explore the pros & cons of Elm and its alternatives. Learn about popular competitors like TypeScript, React, and PureScript
745
319

What is Elm and what are its top alternatives?

Writing HTML apps is super easy with elm-lang/html. Not only does it render extremely fast, it also quietly guides you towards well-architected code.
Elm is a tool in the Package Managers category of a tech stack.
Elm is an open source tool with GitHub stars and GitHub forks. Here’s a link to Elm's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to Elm

  • TypeScript
    TypeScript

    TypeScript is a language for application-scale JavaScript development. It's a typed superset of JavaScript that compiles to plain JavaScript. ...

  • React
    React

    Lots of people use React as the V in MVC. Since React makes no assumptions about the rest of your technology stack, it's easy to try it out on a small feature in an existing project. ...

  • PureScript
    PureScript

    A small strongly typed programming language with expressive types that compiles to JavaScript, written in and inspired by Haskell. ...

  • ReasonML
    ReasonML

    It lets you write simple, fast and quality type safe code while leveraging both the JavaScript & OCaml ecosystems.It is powerful, safe type inference means you rarely have to annotate types, but everything gets checked for you. ...

  • Haskell
    Haskell

    It is a general purpose language that can be used in any domain and use case, it is ideally suited for proprietary business logic and data analysis, fast prototyping and enhancing existing software environments with correct code, performance and scalability. ...

  • Svelte
    Svelte

    If you've ever built a JavaScript application, the chances are you've encountered – or at least heard of – frameworks like React, Angular, Vue and Ractive. Like Svelte, these tools all share a goal of making it easy to build slick interactive user interfaces. Rather than interpreting your application code at run time, your app is converted into ideal JavaScript at build time. That means you don't pay the performance cost of the framework's abstractions, or incur a penalty when your app first loads. ...

  • Elixir
    Elixir

    Elixir leverages the Erlang VM, known for running low-latency, distributed and fault-tolerant systems, while also being successfully used in web development and the embedded software domain. ...

  • Git
    Git

    Git is a free and open source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency. ...

Elm alternatives & related posts

TypeScript logo

TypeScript

93.8K
72.2K
502
A superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output
93.8K
72.2K
+ 1
502
PROS OF TYPESCRIPT
  • 174
    More intuitive and type safe javascript
  • 106
    Type safe
  • 80
    JavaScript superset
  • 48
    The best AltJS ever
  • 27
    Best AltJS for BackEnd
  • 15
    Powerful type system, including generics & JS features
  • 11
    Compile time errors
  • 11
    Nice and seamless hybrid of static and dynamic typing
  • 10
    Aligned with ES development for compatibility
  • 7
    Angular
  • 7
    Structural, rather than nominal, subtyping
  • 5
    Starts and ends with JavaScript
  • 1
    Garbage collection
CONS OF TYPESCRIPT
  • 5
    Code may look heavy and confusing
  • 4
    Hype

related TypeScript posts

Yshay Yaacobi

Our first experience with .NET core was when we developed our OSS feature management platform - Tweek (https://github.com/soluto/tweek). We wanted to create a solution that is able to run anywhere (super important for OSS), has excellent performance characteristics and can fit in a multi-container architecture. We decided to implement our rule engine processor in F# , our main service was implemented in C# and other components were built using JavaScript / TypeScript and Go.

Visual Studio Code worked really well for us as well, it worked well with all our polyglot services and the .Net core integration had great cross-platform developer experience (to be fair, F# was a bit trickier) - actually, each of our team members used a different OS (Ubuntu, macos, windows). Our production deployment ran for a time on Docker Swarm until we've decided to adopt Kubernetes with almost seamless migration process.

After our positive experience of running .Net core workloads in containers and developing Tweek's .Net services on non-windows machines, C# had gained back some of its popularity (originally lost to Node.js), and other teams have been using it for developing microservices, k8s sidecars (like https://github.com/Soluto/airbag), cli tools, serverless functions and other projects...

See more
Adebayo Akinlaja
Engineering Manager at Andela · | 30 upvotes · 3.4M views

I picked up an idea to develop and it was no brainer I had to go with React for the frontend. I was faced with challenges when it came to what component framework to use. I had worked extensively with Material-UI but I needed something different that would offer me wider range of well customized components (I became pretty slow at styling). I brought in Evergreen after several sampling and reads online but again, after several prototype development against Evergreen—since I was using TypeScript and I had to import custom Type, it felt exhaustive. After I validated Evergreen with the designs of the idea I was developing, I also noticed I might have to do a lot of styling. I later stumbled on Material Kit, the one specifically made for React . It was promising with beautifully crafted components, most of which fits into the designs pages I had on ground.

A major problem of Material Kit for me is it isn't written in TypeScript and there isn't any plans to support its TypeScript version. I rolled up my sleeve and started converting their components to TypeScript and if you'll ask me, I am still on it.

In summary, I used the Create React App with TypeScript support and I am spending some time converting Material Kit to TypeScript before I start developing against it. All of these components are going to be hosted on Bit.

If you feel I am crazy or I have gotten something wrong, I'll be willing to listen to your opinion. Also, if you want to have a share of whatever TypeScript version of Material Kit I end up coming up with, let me know.

See more
React logo

React

172.7K
142.6K
4.1K
A JavaScript library for building user interfaces
172.7K
142.6K
+ 1
4.1K
PROS OF REACT
  • 832
    Components
  • 673
    Virtual dom
  • 578
    Performance
  • 508
    Simplicity
  • 442
    Composable
  • 186
    Data flow
  • 166
    Declarative
  • 128
    Isn't an mvc framework
  • 120
    Reactive updates
  • 115
    Explicit app state
  • 50
    JSX
  • 29
    Learn once, write everywhere
  • 22
    Easy to Use
  • 21
    Uni-directional data flow
  • 17
    Works great with Flux Architecture
  • 11
    Great perfomance
  • 10
    Javascript
  • 9
    Built by Facebook
  • 8
    TypeScript support
  • 6
    Server Side Rendering
  • 6
    Speed
  • 5
    Feels like the 90s
  • 5
    Excellent Documentation
  • 5
    Props
  • 5
    Functional
  • 5
    Easy as Lego
  • 5
    Closer to standard JavaScript and HTML than others
  • 5
    Cross-platform
  • 5
    Easy to start
  • 5
    Hooks
  • 5
    Awesome
  • 5
    Scalable
  • 4
    Super easy
  • 4
    Allows creating single page applications
  • 4
    Server side views
  • 4
    Sdfsdfsdf
  • 4
    Start simple
  • 4
    Strong Community
  • 4
    Fancy third party tools
  • 4
    Scales super well
  • 3
    Has arrow functions
  • 3
    Beautiful and Neat Component Management
  • 3
    Just the View of MVC
  • 3
    Simple, easy to reason about and makes you productive
  • 3
    Fast evolving
  • 3
    SSR
  • 3
    Great migration pathway for older systems
  • 3
    Rich ecosystem
  • 3
    Simple
  • 3
    Has functional components
  • 3
    Every decision architecture wise makes sense
  • 3
    Very gentle learning curve
  • 2
    Split your UI into components with one true state
  • 2
    Image upload
  • 2
    Permissively-licensed
  • 2
    Fragments
  • 2
    Sharable
  • 2
    Recharts
  • 2
    HTML-like
  • 1
    React hooks
  • 1
    Datatables
CONS OF REACT
  • 41
    Requires discipline to keep architecture organized
  • 30
    No predefined way to structure your app
  • 29
    Need to be familiar with lots of third party packages
  • 13
    JSX
  • 10
    Not enterprise friendly
  • 6
    One-way binding only
  • 3
    State consistency with backend neglected
  • 3
    Bad Documentation
  • 2
    Error boundary is needed
  • 2
    Paradigms change too fast

related React posts

Johnny Bell

I was building a personal project that I needed to store items in a real time database. I am more comfortable with my Frontend skills than my backend so I didn't want to spend time building out anything in Ruby or Go.

I stumbled on Firebase by #Google, and it was really all I needed. It had realtime data, an area for storing file uploads and best of all for the amount of data I needed it was free!

I built out my application using tools I was familiar with, React for the framework, Redux.js to manage my state across components, and styled-components for the styling.

Now as this was a project I was just working on in my free time for fun I didn't really want to pay for hosting. I did some research and I found Netlify. I had actually seen them at #ReactRally the year before and deployed a Gatsby site to Netlify already.

Netlify was very easy to setup and link to my GitHub account you select a repo and pretty much with very little configuration you have a live site that will deploy every time you push to master.

With the selection of these tools I was able to build out my application, connect it to a realtime database, and deploy to a live environment all with $0 spent.

If you're looking to build out a small app I suggest giving these tools a go as you can get your idea out into the real world for absolutely no cost.

See more
Collins Ogbuzuru
Front-end dev at Evolve credit · | 37 upvotes · 241.9K views

Your tech stack is solid for building a real-time messaging project.

React and React Native are excellent choices for the frontend, especially if you want to have both web and mobile versions of your application share code.

ExpressJS is an unopinionated framework that affords you the flexibility to use it's features at your term, which is a good start. However, I would recommend you explore Sails.js as well. Sails.js is built on top of Express.js and it provides additional features out of the box, especially the Websocket integration that your project requires.

Don't forget to set up Graphql codegen, this would improve your dev experience (Add Typescript, if you can too).

I don't know much about databases but you might want to consider using NO-SQL. I used Firebase real-time db and aws dynamo db on a few of my personal projects and I love they're easy to work with and offer more flexibility for a chat application.

See more
PureScript logo

PureScript

88
85
18
A strongly-typed language that compiles to Javascript
88
85
+ 1
18
PROS OF PURESCRIPT
  • 6
    Purely functional
  • 4
    Great FFI to JavaScript
  • 2
    The best type system
  • 2
    Alternate backends
  • 1
    Pursuit
  • 1
    More Haskell-ish than Haskell
  • 1
    Coherent type classes
  • 1
    Libraries
CONS OF PURESCRIPT
  • 1
    No JSX/Template
  • 1
    Have Some Bugs
  • 1
    Not so fancy error reporting

related PureScript posts

ReasonML logo

ReasonML

75
92
8
A friendly programming language for JavaScript and OCaml
75
92
+ 1
8
PROS OF REASONML
  • 4
    Pattern Matching
  • 3
    Type System
  • 1
    React
CONS OF REASONML
  • 1
    Bindings

related ReasonML posts

Haskell logo

Haskell

1.4K
1.2K
527
An advanced purely-functional programming language
1.4K
1.2K
+ 1
527
PROS OF HASKELL
  • 90
    Purely-functional programming
  • 66
    Statically typed
  • 59
    Type-safe
  • 39
    Open source
  • 38
    Great community
  • 31
    Built-in concurrency
  • 30
    Built-in parallelism
  • 30
    Composable
  • 24
    Referentially transparent
  • 20
    Generics
  • 15
    Type inference
  • 15
    Intellectual satisfaction
  • 12
    If it compiles, it's correct
  • 8
    Flexible
  • 8
    Monads
  • 5
    Great type system
  • 4
    Proposition testing with QuickCheck
  • 4
    One of the most powerful languages *(see blub paradox)*
  • 4
    Purely-functional Programming
  • 3
    Highly expressive, type-safe, fast development time
  • 3
    Pattern matching and completeness checking
  • 3
    Great maintainability of the code
  • 3
    Fun
  • 3
    Reliable
  • 2
    Best in class thinking tool
  • 2
    Kind system
  • 2
    Better type-safe than sorry
  • 2
    Type classes
  • 1
    Predictable
  • 1
    Orthogonality
CONS OF HASKELL
  • 9
    Too much distraction in language extensions
  • 8
    Error messages can be very confusing
  • 5
    Libraries have poor documentation
  • 3
    No good ABI
  • 3
    No best practices
  • 2
    Poor packaging for apps written in it for Linux distros
  • 2
    Sometimes performance is unpredictable
  • 1
    Slow compilation
  • 1
    Monads are hard to understand

related Haskell posts

Shared insights
on
HaskellHaskellScalaScala

Why I am using Haskell in my free time?

I have 3 reasons for it. I am looking for:

Fun.

Improve functional programming skill.

Improve problem-solving skill.

Laziness and mathematical abstractions behind Haskell makes it a wonderful language.

It is Pure functional, it helps me to write better Scala code.

Highly expressive language gives elegant ways to solve coding puzzle.

See more
Svelte logo

Svelte

1.6K
1.5K
498
A UI framework that compiles into tiny standalone JavaScript modules
1.6K
1.5K
+ 1
498
PROS OF SVELTE
  • 57
    Performance
  • 40
    Reactivity
  • 35
    Components
  • 35
    Simplicity
  • 34
    Javascript compiler (do that browsers don't have to)
  • 30
    Lightweight
  • 28
    Near to no learning curve
  • 26
    Fast as vanilajs
  • 26
    Real Reactivity
  • 22
    All in one
  • 18
    Compiler based
  • 18
    Use existing js libraries
  • 17
    SSR
  • 16
    Scalable
  • 16
    Very easy for beginners
  • 13
    Composable
  • 12
    No runtime overhead
  • 12
    Ease of use
  • 10
    Built in store
  • 9
    Typescript
  • 7
    Start with pure html + css
  • 7
    Best Developer Experience
  • 6
    Templates
  • 4
    Speed
CONS OF SVELTE
  • 3
    Event Listener Overload
  • 2
    Little to no libraries
  • 2
    Complex
  • 2
    Learning Curve
  • 2
    Hard to learn

related Svelte posts

Sarmad Chaudhary
Founder & CEO at Ebiz Ltd. · | 9 upvotes · 1.3M views

Hi there!

I just want to have a simple poll/vote...

If you guys need a UI/Component Library for React, Vue.js, or AngularJS, which type of library would you prefer between:

1 ) A single maintained cross-framework library that is 100% compatible and can be integrated with any popular framework like Vue, React, Angular 2, Svelte, etc.

2) A native framework-specific library developed to work only on target framework like ElementUI for Vue, Ant Design for React.

Your advice would help a lot! Thanks in advance :)

See more
Aleksander Jess
Marketer at ITMAGINATION · | 5 upvotes · 15.4K views

React is pretty much the standard nowadays. Companies of all sizes released integrations: the ecommerce ones too. I will bring up Shopify , that released their Hydrogen

There are (arguably) much better tools than React, you are right. There's Svelte (SvelteKit) , Solid.js, and more. They all suffer from morer or less the same issue, though (when it comes to SEO, at least).

The problem is not with React , it's with SPAs. It used to be (and still is sometimes) that search engines' bots wouldn't run JavaScript , meaning they wouldn't see anything on the page. Nowadays, it is said they do load it, but that takes longer than loading the HTML, which is what they are mostly interested in.

So what do you do? You use a static site generator, a prerenderer, a static site, or a server-side rendered site. Next.js does both SSG & SSR, which is why your Next.js sites should rank higher than the plain React sites (assuming the same content & structure).

I hope this answers your question.

See more
Elixir logo

Elixir

3.4K
3.3K
1.3K
Dynamic, functional language designed for building scalable and maintainable applications
3.4K
3.3K
+ 1
1.3K
PROS OF ELIXIR
  • 174
    Concurrency
  • 162
    Functional
  • 133
    Erlang vm
  • 113
    Great documentation
  • 105
    Great tooling
  • 87
    Immutable data structures
  • 81
    Open source
  • 77
    Pattern-matching
  • 62
    Easy to get started
  • 59
    Actor library
  • 32
    Functional with a neat syntax
  • 29
    Ruby inspired
  • 25
    Erlang evolved
  • 24
    Homoiconic
  • 22
    Beauty of Ruby, Speed of Erlang/C
  • 17
    Fault Tolerant
  • 14
    Simple
  • 13
    High Performance
  • 11
    Doc as first class citizen
  • 11
    Good lang
  • 11
    Pipe Operator
  • 9
    Stinkin' fast, no memory leaks, easy on the eyes
  • 9
    Fun to write
  • 8
    OTP
  • 8
    Resilient to failure
  • 6
    GenServer takes the guesswork out of background work
  • 4
    Pattern matching
  • 4
    Not Swift
  • 4
    Idempotence
  • 4
    Fast, Concurrent with clean error messages
  • 3
    Easy to use
  • 2
    Dynamic Typing
  • 2
    Error isolation
CONS OF ELIXIR
  • 11
    Fewer jobs for Elixir experts
  • 7
    Smaller userbase than other mainstream languages
  • 5
    Elixir's dot notation less readable ("object": 1st arg)
  • 4
    Dynamic typing
  • 2
    Difficult to understand
  • 1
    Not a lot of learning books available

related Elixir posts

Kamil Kowalski
Lead Architect at Fresha · | 28 upvotes · 4M views

When you think about test automation, it’s crucial to make it everyone’s responsibility (not just QA Engineers'). We started with Selenium and Java, but with our platform revolving around Ruby, Elixir and JavaScript, QA Engineers were left alone to automate tests. Cypress was the answer, as we could switch to JS and simply involve more people from day one. There's a downside too, as it meant testing on Chrome only, but that was "good enough" for us + if really needed we can always cover some specific cases in a different way.

See more
Sebastian Gębski

Another major decision was to adopt Elixir and Phoenix Framework - the DX (Developer eXperience) is pretty similar to what we know from RoR, but this tech is running on the top of rock-solid Erlang platform which is powering planet-scale telecom solutions for 20+ years. So we're getting pretty much the best from both worlds: minimum friction & smart conventions that eliminate the excessive boilerplate AND highly concurrent EVM (Erlang's Virtual Machine) that makes all the scalability problems vanish. The transition was very smooth - none of Ruby developers we had decided to leave because of Elixir. What is more, we kept recruiting Ruby developers w/o any requirement regarding Elixir proficiency & we still were able to educate them internally in almost no time. Obviously Elixir comes with some more tools in the stack: Credo , Hex , AppSignal (required to properly monitor BEAM apps).

See more
Git logo

Git

296.9K
178.2K
6.6K
Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
296.9K
178.2K
+ 1
6.6K
PROS OF GIT
  • 1.4K
    Distributed version control system
  • 1.1K
    Efficient branching and merging
  • 959
    Fast
  • 845
    Open source
  • 726
    Better than svn
  • 368
    Great command-line application
  • 306
    Simple
  • 291
    Free
  • 232
    Easy to use
  • 222
    Does not require server
  • 27
    Distributed
  • 22
    Small & Fast
  • 18
    Feature based workflow
  • 15
    Staging Area
  • 13
    Most wide-spread VSC
  • 11
    Role-based codelines
  • 11
    Disposable Experimentation
  • 7
    Frictionless Context Switching
  • 6
    Data Assurance
  • 5
    Efficient
  • 4
    Just awesome
  • 3
    Github integration
  • 3
    Easy branching and merging
  • 2
    Compatible
  • 2
    Flexible
  • 2
    Possible to lose history and commits
  • 1
    Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing
  • 1
    Light
  • 1
    Team Integration
  • 1
    Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
  • 1
    Easy
  • 1
    Flexible, easy, Safe, and fast
  • 1
    CLI is great, but the GUI tools are awesome
  • 1
    It's what you do
  • 0
    Phinx
CONS OF GIT
  • 16
    Hard to learn
  • 11
    Inconsistent command line interface
  • 9
    Easy to lose uncommitted work
  • 8
    Worst documentation ever possibly made
  • 5
    Awful merge handling
  • 3
    Unexistent preventive security flows
  • 3
    Rebase hell
  • 2
    Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly
  • 2
    When --force is disabled, cannot rebase
  • 1
    Doesn't scale for big data

related Git posts

Simon Reymann
Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 11M views

Our whole DevOps stack consists of the following tools:

  • GitHub (incl. GitHub Pages/Markdown for Documentation, GettingStarted and HowTo's) for collaborative review and code management tool
  • Respectively Git as revision control system
  • SourceTree as Git GUI
  • Visual Studio Code as IDE
  • CircleCI for continuous integration (automatize development process)
  • Prettier / TSLint / ESLint as code linter
  • SonarQube as quality gate
  • Docker as container management (incl. Docker Compose for multi-container application management)
  • VirtualBox for operating system simulation tests
  • Kubernetes as cluster management for docker containers
  • Heroku for deploying in test environments
  • nginx as web server (preferably used as facade server in production environment)
  • SSLMate (using OpenSSL) for certificate management
  • Amazon EC2 (incl. Amazon S3) for deploying in stage (production-like) and production environments
  • PostgreSQL as preferred database system
  • Redis as preferred in-memory database/store (great for caching)

The main reason we have chosen Kubernetes over Docker Swarm is related to the following artifacts:

  • Key features: Easy and flexible installation, Clear dashboard, Great scaling operations, Monitoring is an integral part, Great load balancing concepts, Monitors the condition and ensures compensation in the event of failure.
  • Applications: An application can be deployed using a combination of pods, deployments, and services (or micro-services).
  • Functionality: Kubernetes as a complex installation and setup process, but it not as limited as Docker Swarm.
  • Monitoring: It supports multiple versions of logging and monitoring when the services are deployed within the cluster (Elasticsearch/Kibana (ELK), Heapster/Grafana, Sysdig cloud integration).
  • Scalability: All-in-one framework for distributed systems.
  • Other Benefits: Kubernetes is backed by the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), huge community among container orchestration tools, it is an open source and modular tool that works with any OS.
See more
Tymoteusz Paul
Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 9.7M views

Often enough I have to explain my way of going about setting up a CI/CD pipeline with multiple deployment platforms. Since I am a bit tired of yapping the same every single time, I've decided to write it up and share with the world this way, and send people to read it instead ;). I will explain it on "live-example" of how the Rome got built, basing that current methodology exists only of readme.md and wishes of good luck (as it usually is ;)).

It always starts with an app, whatever it may be and reading the readmes available while Vagrant and VirtualBox is installing and updating. Following that is the first hurdle to go over - convert all the instruction/scripts into Ansible playbook(s), and only stopping when doing a clear vagrant up or vagrant reload we will have a fully working environment. As our Vagrant environment is now functional, it's time to break it! This is the moment to look for how things can be done better (too rigid/too lose versioning? Sloppy environment setup?) and replace them with the right way to do stuff, one that won't bite us in the backside. This is the point, and the best opportunity, to upcycle the existing way of doing dev environment to produce a proper, production-grade product.

I should probably digress here for a moment and explain why. I firmly believe that the way you deploy production is the same way you should deploy develop, shy of few debugging-friendly setting. This way you avoid the discrepancy between how production work vs how development works, which almost always causes major pains in the back of the neck, and with use of proper tools should mean no more work for the developers. That's why we start with Vagrant as developer boxes should be as easy as vagrant up, but the meat of our product lies in Ansible which will do meat of the work and can be applied to almost anything: AWS, bare metal, docker, LXC, in open net, behind vpn - you name it.

We must also give proper consideration to monitoring and logging hoovering at this point. My generic answer here is to grab Elasticsearch, Kibana, and Logstash. While for different use cases there may be better solutions, this one is well battle-tested, performs reasonably and is very easy to scale both vertically (within some limits) and horizontally. Logstash rules are easy to write and are well supported in maintenance through Ansible, which as I've mentioned earlier, are at the very core of things, and creating triggers/reports and alerts based on Elastic and Kibana is generally a breeze, including some quite complex aggregations.

If we are happy with the state of the Ansible it's time to move on and put all those roles and playbooks to work. Namely, we need something to manage our CI/CD pipelines. For me, the choice is obvious: TeamCity. It's modern, robust and unlike most of the light-weight alternatives, it's transparent. What I mean by that is that it doesn't tell you how to do things, doesn't limit your ways to deploy, or test, or package for that matter. Instead, it provides a developer-friendly and rich playground for your pipelines. You can do most the same with Jenkins, but it has a quite dated look and feel to it, while also missing some key functionality that must be brought in via plugins (like quality REST API which comes built-in with TeamCity). It also comes with all the common-handy plugins like Slack or Apache Maven integration.

The exact flow between CI and CD varies too greatly from one application to another to describe, so I will outline a few rules that guide me in it: 1. Make build steps as small as possible. This way when something breaks, we know exactly where, without needing to dig and root around. 2. All security credentials besides development environment must be sources from individual Vault instances. Keys to those containers should exist only on the CI/CD box and accessible by a few people (the less the better). This is pretty self-explanatory, as anything besides dev may contain sensitive data and, at times, be public-facing. Because of that appropriate security must be present. TeamCity shines in this department with excellent secrets-management. 3. Every part of the build chain shall consume and produce artifacts. If it creates nothing, it likely shouldn't be its own build. This way if any issue shows up with any environment or version, all developer has to do it is grab appropriate artifacts to reproduce the issue locally. 4. Deployment builds should be directly tied to specific Git branches/tags. This enables much easier tracking of what caused an issue, including automated identifying and tagging the author (nothing like automated regression testing!).

Speaking of deployments, I generally try to keep it simple but also with a close eye on the wallet. Because of that, I am more than happy with AWS or another cloud provider, but also constantly peeking at the loads and do we get the value of what we are paying for. Often enough the pattern of use is not constantly erratic, but rather has a firm baseline which could be migrated away from the cloud and into bare metal boxes. That is another part where this approach strongly triumphs over the common Docker and CircleCI setup, where you are very much tied in to use cloud providers and getting out is expensive. Here to embrace bare-metal hosting all you need is a help of some container-based self-hosting software, my personal preference is with Proxmox and LXC. Following that all you must write are ansible scripts to manage hardware of Proxmox, similar way as you do for Amazon EC2 (ansible supports both greatly) and you are good to go. One does not exclude another, quite the opposite, as they can live in great synergy and cut your costs dramatically (the heavier your base load, the bigger the savings) while providing production-grade resiliency.

See more