Alternatives to Google Cloud Build logo

Alternatives to Google Cloud Build

Jenkins, CircleCI, GitLab, Azure DevOps, and GitHub Actions are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Google Cloud Build.
133
125
+ 1
2

What is Google Cloud Build and what are its top alternatives?

Cloud Build lets you build software quickly across all languages. Get complete control over defining custom workflows for building, testing, and deploying across multiple environments such as VMs, serverless, Kubernetes, or Firebase.
Google Cloud Build is a tool in the Continuous Deployment category of a tech stack.

Top Alternatives to Google Cloud Build

  • 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. ...

  • CircleCI

    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. ...

  • GitLab

    GitLab

    GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers. ...

  • Azure DevOps

    Azure DevOps

    Azure DevOps provides unlimited private Git hosting, cloud build for continuous integration, agile planning, and release management for continuous delivery to the cloud and on-premises. Includes broad IDE support. ...

  • GitHub Actions

    GitHub Actions

    It makes it easy to automate all your software workflows, now with world-class CI/CD. Build, test, and deploy your code right from GitHub. Make code reviews, branch management, and issue triaging work the way you want. ...

  • AWS CodePipeline

    AWS CodePipeline

    CodePipeline builds, tests, and deploys your code every time there is a code change, based on the release process models you define. ...

  • Buddy

    Buddy

    Git platform for web and software developers with Docker-based tools for Continuous Integration and Deployment. ...

  • Spinnaker

    Spinnaker

    Created at Netflix, it has been battle-tested in production by hundreds of teams over millions of deployments. It combines a powerful and flexible pipeline management system with integrations to the major cloud providers. ...

Google Cloud Build alternatives & related posts

Jenkins logo

Jenkins

38.7K
31.4K
2.2K
An extendable open source continuous integration server
38.7K
31.4K
+ 1
2.2K
PROS OF JENKINS
  • 521
    Hosted internally
  • 463
    Free open source
  • 313
    Great to build, deploy or launch anything async
  • 243
    Tons of integrations
  • 208
    Rich set of plugins with good documentation
  • 108
    Has support for build pipelines
  • 72
    Open source and tons of integrations
  • 63
    Easy setup
  • 61
    It is open-source
  • 54
    Workflow plugin
  • 11
    Configuration as code
  • 10
    Very powerful tool
  • 9
    Many Plugins
  • 8
    Great flexibility
  • 8
    Git and Maven integration is better
  • 7
    Continuous Integration
  • 6
    Slack Integration (plugin)
  • 6
    Github integration
  • 5
    100% free and open source
  • 5
    Self-hosted GitLab Integration (plugin)
  • 5
    Easy customisation
  • 4
    Docker support
  • 3
    Platform idnependency
  • 3
    Pipeline API
  • 3
    Fast builds
  • 3
    Excellent docker integration
  • 2
    Hosted Externally
  • 2
    It`w worked
  • 2
    Can be run as a Docker container
  • 2
    Customizable
  • 2
    AWS Integration
  • 2
    It's Everywhere
  • 2
    JOBDSL
  • 1
    NodeJS Support
  • 1
    PHP Support
  • 1
    Ruby/Rails Support
  • 1
    Universal controller
  • 1
    Easily extendable with seamless integration
  • 1
    Build PR Branch Only
CONS OF JENKINS
  • 12
    Workarounds needed for basic requirements
  • 8
    Groovy with cumbersome syntax
  • 6
    Plugins compatibility issues
  • 6
    Limited abilities with declarative pipelines
  • 5
    Lack of support
  • 4
    No YAML syntax
  • 2
    Too tied to plugins versions

related Jenkins posts

Thierry Schellenbach

Releasing new versions of our services is done by Travis CI. Travis first runs our test suite. Once it passes, it publishes a new release binary to GitHub.

Common tasks such as installing dependencies for the Go project, or building a binary are automated using plain old Makefiles. (We know, crazy old school, right?) Our binaries are compressed using UPX.

Travis has come a long way over the past years. I used to prefer Jenkins in some cases since it was easier to debug broken builds. With the addition of the aptly named ‚Äúdebug build‚ÄĚ button, Travis is now the clear winner. It‚Äôs easy to use and free for open source, with no need to maintain anything.

#ContinuousIntegration #CodeCollaborationVersionControl

See more
Tymoteusz Paul
Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 21 upvotes · 4.2M 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
CircleCI logo

CircleCI

8.1K
4.9K
957
Automate your development process quickly, safely, and at scale
8.1K
4.9K
+ 1
957
PROS OF CIRCLECI
  • 223
    Github integration
  • 175
    Easy setup
  • 151
    Fast builds
  • 94
    Competitively priced
  • 73
    Slack integration
  • 54
    Docker support
  • 44
    Awesome UI
  • 33
    Great customer support
  • 18
    Ios support
  • 14
    Hipchat integration
  • 12
    SSH debug access
  • 11
    Free for Open Source
  • 5
    Bitbucket integration
  • 5
    Mobile support
  • 4
    Nodejs support
  • 4
    AWS CodeDeploy integration
  • 3
    Great support
  • 3
    YAML configuration
  • 3
    Free for Github private repo
  • 2
    Clojure
  • 2
    Simple, clean UI
  • 2
    Clojurescript
  • 2
    OSX support
  • 2
    Continuous Deployment
  • 1
    Android support
  • 1
    Autoscaling
  • 1
    Fair pricing
  • 1
    All inclusive testing
  • 1
    Helpful documentation
  • 1
    Japanese in rspec comment appears OK
  • 1
    Favorite
  • 1
    Build PR Branch Only
  • 1
    Really easy to use
  • 1
    Unstable
  • 1
    So circular
  • 1
    Easy setup, easy to understand, fast and reliable
  • 1
    Parallel builds for slow test suites
  • 1
    Easy setup. 2.0 is fast!
  • 1
    Parallelism
  • 1
    Extremely configurable
  • 1
    Easy to deploy to private servers
  • 1
    Works
CONS OF CIRCLECI
  • 11
    Unstable
  • 6
    Scammy pricing structure
  • 0
    Aggressive Github permissions

related CircleCI posts

Tymoteusz Paul
Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 21 upvotes · 4.2M 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
Tim Abbott
Shared insights
on
Travis CI
CircleCI
at

We actually started out on Travis CI, but we've migrated our main builds to CircleCI, and it's been a huge improvement.

The reason it's been a huge improvement is that Travis CI has a fundamentally bad design for their images, where they start with a standard base Linux image containing tons of packages (several versions of postgres, every programming language environment, etc). This is potentially nice for the "get builds for a small project running quickly" use case, but it's a total disaster for a larger project that needs a decent number of dependencies and cares about the performance and reliability of their build.

This issue is exacerbated by their networking infrastructure being unreliable; we usually saw over 1% of builds failing due to transient networking errors in Travis CI, even after we added retries to the most frequently failing operations like apt update or pip install. And they never install Ubuntu's point release updates to their images. So doing an apt update, apt install, or especially apt upgrade would take forever. We ended up writing code to actually uninstall many of their base packages and pin the versions of hundreds of others to get a semi-fast, semi-reliable build. It was infuriating.

The CircleCI v2.0 system has the right design for a CI system: we can customize the base image to start with any expensive-to-install packages we need for our build, and we can update that image if and when we want to. The end result is that when migrating, we were able to delete all the hacky optimizations mentioned above, while still ending up with a 50% faster build latency. And we've also had 5-10x fewer issues with networking-related flakes, which means one doesn't have to constantly check whether a build failure is actually due to an issue with the code under test or "just another networking flake".

See more
GitLab logo

GitLab

36.7K
29.4K
2.3K
Open source self-hosted Git management software
36.7K
29.4K
+ 1
2.3K
PROS OF GITLAB
  • 487
    Self hosted
  • 416
    Free
  • 331
    Has community edition
  • 234
    Easy setup
  • 234
    Familiar interface
  • 129
    Includes many features, including ci
  • 105
    Nice UI
  • 79
    Good integration with gitlabci
  • 52
    Simple setup
  • 32
    Has an official mobile app
  • 30
    Free private repository
  • 24
    Continuous Integration
  • 16
    Open source, great ui (like github)
  • 14
    Slack Integration
  • 9
    Full CI flow
  • 8
    Free and unlimited private git repos
  • 8
    User, group, and project access management is simple
  • 7
    Intuitive UI
  • 7
    All in one (Git, CI, Agile..)
  • 6
    Built-in CI
  • 4
    Both public and private Repositories
  • 3
    Mattermost Chat client
  • 3
    Integrated Docker Registry
  • 2
    It's fully integrated
  • 2
    Unlimited free repos & collaborators
  • 2
    I like the its runners and executors feature
  • 2
    CI
  • 2
    So easy to use
  • 2
    One-click install through DigitalOcean
  • 2
    It's powerful source code management tool
  • 2
    Excellent
  • 2
    Build/pipeline definition alongside code
  • 2
    Security and Stable
  • 2
    Issue system
  • 2
    Free private repos
  • 2
    Low maintenance cost due omnibus-deployment
  • 2
    On-premises
  • 1
    Powerful Continuous Integration System
  • 1
    Powerful software planning and maintaining tools
  • 1
    Groups of groups
  • 1
    Kubernetes integration with GitLab CI
  • 1
    Review Apps feature
  • 1
    Built-in Docker Registry
  • 1
    Dockerized
  • 1
    Beautiful
  • 1
    Wounderful
  • 1
    Opensource
  • 1
    Because is the best remote host for git repositories
  • 1
    Not Microsoft Owned
  • 1
    Full DevOps suite with Git
  • 1
    Many private repo
  • 1
    Native CI
  • 1
    HipChat intergration
  • 1
    Kubernetes Integration
  • 1
    Published IP list for whitelisting (gl-infra#434)
  • 1
    Great for team collaboration
  • 1
    It includes everything I need, all packaged with docker
  • 1
    Multilingual interface
  • 1
    The dashboard with deployed environments
  • 0
    Supports Radius/Ldap & Browser Code Edits
CONS OF GITLAB
  • 25
    Slow ui performance
  • 6
    Introduce breaking bugs every release
  • 5
    Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting)
  • 0
    Built-in Docker Registry
  • 0
    Review Apps feature

related GitLab posts

Tim Abbott
Shared insights
on
GitHub
GitLab
at

I have mixed feelings on GitHub as a product and our use of it for the Zulip open source project. On the one hand, I do feel that being on GitHub helps people discover Zulip, because we have enough stars (etc.) that we rank highly among projects on the platform. and there is a definite benefit for lowering barriers to contribution (which is important to us) that GitHub has such a dominant position in terms of what everyone has accounts with.

But even ignoring how one might feel about their new corporate owner (MicroSoft), in a lot of ways GitHub is a bad product for open source projects. Years after the "Dear GitHub" letter, there are still basic gaps in its issue tracker:

  • You can't give someone permission to label/categorize issues without full write access to a project (including ability to merge things to master, post releases, etc.).
  • You can't let anyone with a GitHub account self-assign issues to themselves.
  • Many more similar issues.

It's embarrassing, because I've talked to GitHub product managers at various open source events about these things for 3 years, and they always agree the thing is important, but then nothing ever improves in the Issues product. Maybe the new management at MicroSoft will fix their product management situation, but if not, I imagine we'll eventually do the migration to GitLab.

We have a custom bot project, http://github.com/zulip/zulipbot, to deal with some of these issues where possible, and every other large project we talk to does the same thing, more or less.

See more
Joshua Dean K√ľpper
CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 17 upvotes · 207.4K views

We use GitLab CI because of the great native integration as a part of the GitLab framework and the linting-capabilities it offers. The visualization of complex pipelines and the embedding within the project overview made Gitlab CI even more convenient. We use it for all projects, all deployments and as a part of GitLab Pages.

While we initially used the Shell-executor, we quickly switched to the Docker-executor and use it exclusively now.

We formerly used Jenkins but preferred to handle everything within GitLab . Aside from the unification of our infrastructure another motivation was the "configuration-in-file"-approach, that Gitlab CI offered, while Jenkins support of this concept was very limited and users had to resort to using the webinterface. Since the file is included within the repository, it is also version controlled, which was a huge plus for us.

See more
Azure DevOps logo

Azure DevOps

1.7K
1.9K
219
Services for teams to share code, track work, and ship software
1.7K
1.9K
+ 1
219
PROS OF AZURE DEVOPS
  • 47
    Complete and powerful
  • 28
    Huge extension ecosystem
  • 24
    Azure integration
  • 24
    Flexible and powerful
  • 23
    One Stop Shop For Build server, Project Mgt, CDCI
  • 14
    Everything I need. Simple and intuitive UI
  • 13
    Support Open Source
  • 8
    Integrations
  • 7
    GitHub Integration
  • 6
    Project Mgmt Features
  • 5
    Crap
  • 5
    Cost free for Stakeholders
  • 5
    One 4 all
  • 4
    Runs in the cloud
  • 2
    Jenkins Integration
  • 2
    Agent On-Premise(Linux - Windows)
  • 2
    Aws integration
  • 1
    GCP Integration
CONS OF AZURE DEVOPS
  • 5
    Still dependant on C# for agents
  • 3
    Capacity across cross functional teams not visibile
  • 2
    Not a requirements management tool
  • 2
    Poor Jenkins integration
  • 2
    Half Baked
  • 2
    Jack of all trades, master of none
  • 2
    Many in devops disregard MS altogether

related Azure DevOps posts

Farzad Jalali
Senior Software Architect at BerryWorld · | 8 upvotes · 166.8K views

Visual Studio Azure DevOps Azure Functions Azure Websites #Azure #AzureKeyVault #AzureAD #AzureApps

#Azure Cloud Since Amazon is potentially our competitor then we need a different cloud vendor, also our programmers are microsoft oriented so the choose were obviously #Azure for us.

Azure DevOps Because we need to be able to develop a neww pipeline into Azure environment ina few minutes.

Azure Kubernetes Service We already in #Azure , also need to use K8s , so let's use AKS as it's a manged Kubernetes in the #Azure

See more
Nicholas Rogoff

Secure Membership Web API backed by SQL Server. This is the backing API to store additional profile and complex membership metadata outside of an Azure AD B2C provider. The front-end using the Azure AD B2C to allow 3rd party trusted identity providers to authenticate. This API provides a way to add and manage more complex permission structures than can easily be maintained in Azure AD.

We have .Net developers and an Azure infrastructure environment using server-less functions, logic apps and SaaS where ever possible. For this service I opted to keep it as a classic WebAPI project and deployed to AppService.

  • Trusted Authentication Provider: @AzureActiveDirectoryB2C
  • Frameworks: .NET Core
  • Language: C# , Microsoft SQL Server , JavaScript
  • IDEs: Visual Studio Code , Visual Studio
  • Libraries: jQuery @EntityFramework, @AutoMapper, @FeatureToggle , @Swashbuckle
  • Database: @SqlAzure
  • Source Control: Git
  • Build and Release Pipelines: Azure DevOps
  • Test tools: Postman , Newman
  • Test framework: @nUnit, @moq
  • Infrastructure: @AzureAppService, @AzureAPIManagement
See more
GitHub Actions logo

GitHub Actions

505
270
16
Automate your workflow from idea to production
505
270
+ 1
16
PROS OF GITHUB ACTIONS
  • 3
    Easy to duplicate a workflow
  • 3
    Free
  • 2
    Ready actions in Marketplace
  • 2
    Integration with GitHub
  • 2
    Read actions in Marketplace
  • 1
    Fast
  • 1
    Docker Support
  • 1
    Configs stored in .github
  • 1
    Active Development Roadmap
CONS OF GITHUB ACTIONS
  • 4
    Lacking [skip ci]
  • 3
    Lacking allow failure
  • 2
    Lacking job specific badges
  • 1
    No Deployment Projects
  • 1
    No manual launch

related GitHub Actions posts

Somnath Mahale
Engineering Leader at Altimetrik Corp. · | 8 upvotes · 76.4K views

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!

See more
Omkar Kulkarni
DevOps Engineer at LTI · | 3 upvotes · 1.6K views
Shared insights
on
GitLab
GitHub Actions

Hello Everyone, Can some please help me to understand the difference between GitHub Actions And GitLab I have been trying to understand them, but still did not get how exactly they are different.

See more
AWS CodePipeline logo

AWS CodePipeline

376
641
30
Continuous delivery service for fast and reliable application updates
376
641
+ 1
30
PROS OF AWS CODEPIPELINE
  • 13
    Simple to set up
  • 8
    Managed service
  • 4
    GitHub integration
  • 3
    Parallel Execution
  • 2
    Automatic deployment
  • 0
    Manual Steps Available
CONS OF AWS CODEPIPELINE
  • 2
    No project boards
  • 1
    No integration with "Power" 365 tools

related AWS CodePipeline posts

Khauth György
CTO at SalesAutopilot Kft. · | 12 upvotes · 355.3K views

I'm the CTO of a marketing automation SaaS. Because of the continuously increasing load we moved to the AWSCloud. We are using more and more features of AWS: Amazon CloudWatch, Amazon SNS, Amazon CloudFront, Amazon Route 53 and so on.

Our main Database is MySQL but for the hundreds of GB document data we use MongoDB more and more. We started to use Redis for cache and other time sensitive operations.

On the front-end we use jQuery UI + Smarty but now we refactor our app to use Vue.js with Vuetify. Because our app is relatively complex we need to use vuex as well.

On the development side we use GitHub as our main repo, Docker for local and server environment and Jenkins and AWS CodePipeline for Continuous Integration.

See more
Oliver Burn

We recently added new APIs to Jira to associate information about Builds and Deployments to Jira issues.

The new APIs were developed using a spec-first API approach for speed and sanity. The details of this approach are described in this blog post, and we relied on using Swagger and associated tools like Swagger UI.

A new service was created for managing the data. It provides a REST API for external use, and an internal API based on GraphQL. The service is built using Kotlin for increased developer productivity and happiness, and the Spring-Boot framework. PostgreSQL was chosen for the persistence layer, as we have non-trivial requirements that cannot be easily implemented on top of a key-value store.

The front-end has been built using React and querying the back-end service using an internal GraphQL API. We have plans of providing a public GraphQL API in the future.

New Jira Integrations: Bitbucket CircleCI AWS CodePipeline Octopus Deploy jFrog Azure Pipelines

See more
Buddy logo

Buddy

283
316
601
Build, test and deploy on push in seconds.
283
316
+ 1
601
PROS OF BUDDY
  • 55
    Easy setup
  • 53
    Docker
  • 49
    Integrations
  • 49
    Continuous Integration
  • 45
    Beautiful dashboard
  • 44
    Git hosting
  • 43
    Free
  • 41
    Unlimited pipelines
  • 39
    Backup
  • 39
    Monitoring
  • 36
    Great UX
  • 32
    On-Premises
  • 31
    Awesome support
  • 6
    AWS Integrations
  • 4
    Great UI
  • 3
    Slack integration
  • 3
    Continuous deployment
  • 3
    Simple deployments
  • 3
    Hosted internally (Enterprise)
  • 3
    Bitbucket integration
  • 2
    Fast execution
  • 2
    Node.js support
  • 2
    Amazing + free
  • 2
    Azure integration
  • 2
    Github integration
  • 2
    UI and YML configuration
  • 1
    Shopify integration
  • 1
    Support for build pipelines
  • 1
    Docker support
  • 1
    Gitlab integration
  • 1
    Android support
  • 1
    Pushover integration
  • 1
    DigitalOcean integration
  • 1
    UpCloud integration
  • 0
    New Relic integration
  • 0
    Rollbar integration
  • 0
    Sentry integration
  • 0
    Loggly integration
  • 0
    Datadog integration
  • 0
    Bugsnag integration
  • 0
    Honeybadger integration
  • 0
    Telegram integration
  • 0
    HipChat integration
  • 0
    Discord integration
  • 0
    Pushbulet integration
  • 0
    Rackspace integration
  • 0
    Slack Integration
  • 0
    Google Cloud integration
  • 0
    Heroku integration
  • 0
    Kubernetes support
  • 0
    AWS integration
CONS OF BUDDY
  • 1
    Deleted account after 1 month of not pushing code

related Buddy posts

CDG

I use Laravel because it's the most advances PHP framework out there, easy to maintain, easy to upgrade and most of all : easy to get a handle on, and to follow every new technology ! PhpStorm is our main software to code, as of simplicity and full range of tools for a modern application.

Google Analytics Analytics of course for a tailored analytics, Bulma as an innovative CSS framework, coupled with our Sass (Scss) pre-processor.

As of more basic stuff, we use HTML5, JavaScript (but with Vue.js too) and Webpack to handle the generation of all this.

To deploy, we set up Buddy to easily send the updates on our nginx / Ubuntu server, where it will connect to our GitHub Git private repository, pull and do all the operations needed with Deployer .

CloudFlare ensure the rapidity of distribution of our content, and Let's Encrypt the https certificate that is more than necessary when we'll want to sell some products with our Stripe api calls.

Asana is here to let us list all the functionalities, possibilities and ideas we want to implement.

See more
Spinnaker logo

Spinnaker

180
265
9
Multi-cloud continuous delivery platform for releasing software changes with high velocity and confidence
180
265
+ 1
9
PROS OF SPINNAKER
  • 9
    Mature
CONS OF SPINNAKER
  • 2
    No GitOps
  • 1
    Configuration time
  • 1
    Management overhead
  • 1
    Ease of use

related Spinnaker posts

John Kodumal

LaunchDarkly is almost a five year old company, and our methodology for deploying was state of the art... for 2014. We recently undertook a project to modernize the way we #deploy our software, moving from Ansible-based deploy scripts that executed on our local machines, to using Spinnaker (along with Terraform and Packer) as the basis of our deployment system. We've been using Armory's enterprise Spinnaker offering to make this project a reality.

See more