Alternatives to Jenkins X logo

Alternatives to Jenkins X

Jenkins, Spinnaker, Blue Ocean, GitLab CI, and Red Hat OpenShift are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Jenkins X.
149
370
+ 1
16

What is Jenkins X and what are its top alternatives?

Jenkins X is an open-source automation server that aims to automate the process of continuous integration and continuous delivery (CI/CD) for cloud-native applications on Kubernetes. Key features include automatic pipeline creation, GitOps principles, support for multiple programming languages and frameworks, and environment promotion through preview environments. However, some limitations of Jenkins X include a steep learning curve, complex setup and configuration, and potential performance issues with large pipelines.

  1. Tekton Pipelines: Tekton Pipelines is a flexible, cloud-native CI/CD tool that allows you to build, test, and deploy across multiple cloud providers or on-premises systems. It offers a Kubernetes-native implementation and supports container-based workflows. Pros include fine-grained control over pipelines and reusable, composable tasks, but it may require a higher level of expertise compared to Jenkins X.
  2. GitLab CI/CD: GitLab CI/CD provides a complete DevOps platform with built-in CI/CD functionality. It offers features such as version control, issue tracking, and code review in addition to CI/CD pipelines. Pros include tight integration with GitLab repositories and a user-friendly interface, but it may lack some advanced automation capabilities present in Jenkins X.
  3. CircleCI: CircleCI is a cloud-based CI/CD tool that automates the software development process. It supports parallelism, caching, and workflows for efficient pipeline execution. Pros include fast build times and seamless integration with GitHub repositories, but it may come at a higher cost compared to Jenkins X.
  4. GitHub Actions: GitHub Actions is a CI/CD service that allows you to automate workflows directly within your GitHub repository. It offers integration with GitHub events and repositories for streamlined automation. Pros include easy setup and configuration for GitHub users, but it may lack some advanced CI/CD features present in Jenkins X.
  5. Drone: Drone is a container-native CI/CD platform that is built on open-source technologies. It offers support for multiple version control systems and container registries, as well as flexible pipeline configuration options. Pros include scalability and extensibility through plugins, but it may require more manual setup compared to Jenkins X.
  6. Spinnaker: Spinnaker is an open-source, multi-cloud continuous delivery platform that enables complex deployment strategies. It supports multiple cloud providers and canary deployments for gradual release processes. Pros include advanced deployment capabilities and support for microservices architectures, but it may have a steeper learning curve than Jenkins X.
  7. Concourse CI: Concourse CI is a container-based CI/CD tool that focuses on simplicity and automation. It provides a declarative configuration language and supports pipeline visualization for easy monitoring. Pros include scalability and reliability, but it may require more manual configuration compared to Jenkins X.
  8. TeamCity: TeamCity is a CI/CD server by JetBrains that supports multiple build configurations and integrations with popular version control systems. It offers a user-friendly interface and build failure analysis for troubleshooting. Pros include robust build management features and cross-platform support, but it may not be as cloud-native as Jenkins X.
  9. Bamboo: Bamboo is a CI/CD tool by Atlassian that integrates with Jira and Bitbucket for seamless software development workflows. It offers build agents for parallel execution and deployment pipelines with deployment projects. Pros include tight integration with Atlassian products and user-friendly deployment management, but it may lack some advanced automation capabilities found in Jenkins X.
  10. Buildkite: Buildkite is a flexible CI/CD platform that allows you to run fast, secure, and scalable pipelines on your infrastructure. It offers customizable pipelines with reusable steps and a web-based UI for pipeline management. Pros include scalability and self-hosted options, but it may require more manual setup compared to Jenkins X.

Top Alternatives to Jenkins X

  • 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. ...

  • 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. ...

  • Blue Ocean
    Blue Ocean

    Designed from the ground up for Jenkins Pipeline and compatible with Freestyle jobs, Blue Ocean reduces clutter and increases clarity for every member of your team. ...

  • GitLab CI
    GitLab CI

    GitLab offers a continuous integration service. If you add a .gitlab-ci.yml file to the root directory of your repository, and configure your GitLab project to use a Runner, then each merge request or push triggers your CI pipeline. ...

  • Red Hat OpenShift
    Red Hat OpenShift

    OpenShift is Red Hat's Cloud Computing Platform as a Service (PaaS) offering. OpenShift is an application platform in the cloud where application developers and teams can build, test, deploy, and run their applications. ...

  • 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. ...

  • Concourse
    Concourse

    Concourse's principles reduce the risk of switching to and from Concourse, by encouraging practices that decouple your project from your CI's little details, and keeping all configuration in declarative files that can be checked into version control. ...

  • Codefresh
    Codefresh

    Automate and parallelize testing. Codefresh allows teams to spin up on-demand compositions to run unit and integration tests as part of the continuous integration process. Jenkins integration allows more complex pipelines. ...

Jenkins X alternatives & related posts

Jenkins logo

Jenkins

58.8K
2.2K
An extendable open source continuous integration server
58.8K
2.2K
PROS OF JENKINS
  • 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
  • 111
    Has support for build pipelines
  • 68
    Easy setup
  • 66
    It is open-source
  • 53
    Workflow plugin
  • 13
    Configuration as code
  • 12
    Very powerful tool
  • 11
    Many Plugins
  • 10
    Continuous Integration
  • 10
    Great flexibility
  • 9
    Git and Maven integration is better
  • 8
    100% free and open source
  • 7
    Github integration
  • 7
    Slack Integration (plugin)
  • 6
    Easy customisation
  • 6
    Self-hosted GitLab Integration (plugin)
  • 5
    Docker support
  • 5
    Pipeline API
  • 4
    Fast builds
  • 4
    Platform idnependency
  • 4
    Hosted Externally
  • 4
    Excellent docker integration
  • 3
    It`w worked
  • 3
    Customizable
  • 3
    Can be run as a Docker container
  • 3
    It's Everywhere
  • 3
    JOBDSL
  • 3
    AWS Integration
  • 2
    Easily extendable with seamless integration
  • 2
    PHP Support
  • 2
    Build PR Branch Only
  • 2
    NodeJS Support
  • 2
    Ruby/Rails Support
  • 2
    Universal controller
  • 2
    Loose Coupling
CONS OF JENKINS
  • 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
  • 5
    No YAML syntax
  • 4
    Too tied to plugins versions

related Jenkins posts

Tymoteusz Paul
Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 10.3M 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
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 “debug build” button, Travis is now the clear winner. It’s easy to use and free for open source, with no need to maintain anything.

#ContinuousIntegration #CodeCollaborationVersionControl

See more
Spinnaker logo

Spinnaker

229
14
Multi-cloud continuous delivery platform for releasing software changes with high velocity and confidence
229
14
PROS OF SPINNAKER
  • 14
    Mature
CONS OF SPINNAKER
  • 3
    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
Blue Ocean logo

Blue Ocean

91
7
A reboot of the Jenkins CI/CD User Experience
91
7
PROS OF BLUE OCEAN
  • 7
    Beautiful interface
CONS OF BLUE OCEAN
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Blue Ocean posts

    GitLab CI logo

    GitLab CI

    2.3K
    75
    GitLab integrated CI to test, build and deploy your code
    2.3K
    75
    PROS OF GITLAB CI
    • 22
      Robust CI with awesome Docker support
    • 13
      Simple configuration
    • 9
      All in one solution
    • 7
      Source Control and CI in one place
    • 5
      Integrated with VCS on commit
    • 5
      Free and open source
    • 5
      Easy to configure own build server i.e. GitLab-Runner
    • 2
      Hosted internally
    • 1
      Built-in Docker Registry
    • 1
      Built-in support of Review Apps
    • 1
      Pipeline could be started manually
    • 1
      Enable or disable pipeline by using env variables
    • 1
      Gitlab templates could be shared across logical group
    • 1
      Easy to setup the dedicated runner to particular job
    • 1
      Built-in support of Kubernetes
    CONS OF GITLAB CI
    • 2
      Works best with GitLab repositories

    related GitLab CI posts

    I have got a small radio service running on Node.js. Front end is written with React and packed with Webpack . I use Docker for my #DeploymentWorkflow along with Docker Swarm and GitLab CI on a single Google Compute Engine instance, which is also a runner itself. Pretty unscalable decision but it works great for tiny projects. The project is available on https://fridgefm.com

    See more
    Joshua Dean Küpper
    CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 20 upvotes · 804.1K 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
    Red Hat OpenShift logo

    Red Hat OpenShift

    1.5K
    517
    Red Hat's free Platform as a Service (PaaS) for hosting Java, PHP, Ruby, Python, Node.js, and Perl apps
    1.5K
    517
    PROS OF RED HAT OPENSHIFT
    • 99
      Good free plan
    • 63
      Open Source
    • 47
      Easy setup
    • 43
      Nodejs support
    • 42
      Well documented
    • 32
      Custom domains
    • 28
      Mongodb support
    • 27
      Clean and simple architecture
    • 25
      PHP support
    • 21
      Customizable environments
    • 11
      Ability to run CRON jobs
    • 9
      Easier than Heroku for a WordPress blog
    • 8
      Easy deployment
    • 7
      PostgreSQL support
    • 7
      Autoscaling
    • 7
      Good balance between Heroku and AWS for flexibility
    • 5
      Free, Easy Setup, Lot of Gear or D.I.Y Gear
    • 4
      Shell access to gears
    • 3
      Great Support
    • 3
      High Security
    • 3
      Logging & Metrics
    • 2
      Cloud Agnostic
    • 2
      Runs Anywhere - AWS, GCP, Azure
    • 2
      No credit card needed
    • 2
      Because it is easy to manage
    • 2
      Secure
    • 2
      Meteor support
    • 2
      Overly complicated and over engineered in majority of e
    • 2
      Golang support
    • 2
      Its free and offer custom domain usage
    • 1
      Autoscaling at a good price point
    • 1
      Easy setup and great customer support
    • 1
      MultiCloud
    • 1
      Great free plan with excellent support
    • 1
      This is the only free one among the three as of today
    CONS OF RED HAT OPENSHIFT
    • 2
      Decisions are made for you, limiting your options
    • 2
      License cost
    • 1
      Behind, sometimes severely, the upstreams

    related Red Hat OpenShift posts

    Conor Myhrvold
    Tech Brand Mgr, Office of CTO at Uber · | 44 upvotes · 13.2M views

    How Uber developed the open source, end-to-end distributed tracing Jaeger , now a CNCF project:

    Distributed tracing is quickly becoming a must-have component in the tools that organizations use to monitor their complex, microservice-based architectures. At Uber, our open source distributed tracing system Jaeger saw large-scale internal adoption throughout 2016, integrated into hundreds of microservices and now recording thousands of traces every second.

    Here is the story of how we got here, from investigating off-the-shelf solutions like Zipkin, to why we switched from pull to push architecture, and how distributed tracing will continue to evolve:

    https://eng.uber.com/distributed-tracing/

    (GitHub Pages : https://www.jaegertracing.io/, GitHub: https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger)

    Bindings/Operator: Python Java Node.js Go C++ Kubernetes JavaScript OpenShift C# Apache Spark

    See more
    Michael Ionita

    We use Kubernetes because we decided to migrate to a hosted cluster (not AWS) and still be able to scale our clusters up and down depending on load. By wrapping it with OpenShift we are now able to easily adapt to demand but also able to separate concerns into separate Pods depending on use-cases we have.

    See more
    GitLab logo

    GitLab

    62.6K
    2.5K
    Open source self-hosted Git management software
    62.6K
    2.5K
    PROS OF GITLAB
    • 508
      Self hosted
    • 431
      Free
    • 339
      Has community edition
    • 242
      Easy setup
    • 240
      Familiar interface
    • 137
      Includes many features, including ci
    • 113
      Nice UI
    • 84
      Good integration with gitlabci
    • 57
      Simple setup
    • 35
      Has an official mobile app
    • 34
      Free private repository
    • 31
      Continuous Integration
    • 23
      Open source, great ui (like github)
    • 18
      Slack Integration
    • 15
      Full CI flow
    • 11
      Free and unlimited private git repos
    • 10
      All in one (Git, CI, Agile..)
    • 10
      User, group, and project access management is simple
    • 8
      Intuitive UI
    • 8
      Built-in CI
    • 6
      Full DevOps suite with Git
    • 6
      Both public and private Repositories
    • 5
      Integrated Docker Registry
    • 5
      So easy to use
    • 5
      CI
    • 5
      Build/pipeline definition alongside code
    • 5
      It's powerful source code management tool
    • 4
      Dockerized
    • 4
      It's fully integrated
    • 4
      On-premises
    • 4
      Security and Stable
    • 4
      Unlimited free repos & collaborators
    • 4
      Not Microsoft Owned
    • 4
      Excellent
    • 4
      Issue system
    • 4
      Mattermost Chat client
    • 3
      Great for team collaboration
    • 3
      Free private repos
    • 3
      Because is the best remote host for git repositories
    • 3
      Built-in Docker Registry
    • 3
      Opensource
    • 3
      Low maintenance cost due omnibus-deployment
    • 3
      I like the its runners and executors feature
    • 2
      Beautiful
    • 2
      Groups of groups
    • 2
      Multilingual interface
    • 2
      Powerful software planning and maintaining tools
    • 2
      Review Apps feature
    • 2
      Kubernetes integration with GitLab CI
    • 2
      One-click install through DigitalOcean
    • 2
      Powerful Continuous Integration System
    • 2
      It includes everything I need, all packaged with docker
    • 2
      The dashboard with deployed environments
    • 2
      HipChat intergration
    • 2
      Many private repo
    • 2
      Kubernetes Integration
    • 2
      Published IP list for whitelisting (gl-infra#434)
    • 2
      Wounderful
    • 2
      Native CI
    • 1
      Supports Radius/Ldap & Browser Code Edits
    CONS OF GITLAB
    • 28
      Slow ui performance
    • 9
      Introduce breaking bugs every release
    • 6
      Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting)
    • 2
      Built-in Docker Registry
    • 1
      Review Apps feature

    related GitLab posts

    Tim Abbott
    Shared insights
    on
    GitHubGitHubGitLabGitLab
    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 Küpper
    CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 20 upvotes · 804.1K 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
    Concourse logo

    Concourse

    261
    54
    Pipeline-based CI system written in Go
    261
    54
    PROS OF CONCOURSE
    • 16
      Real pipelines
    • 10
      Containerised builds
    • 9
      Flexible engine
    • 6
      Fast
    • 4
      Open source
    • 3
      No Snowflakes
    • 3
      Simple configuration management
    • 2
      You have to do everything
    • 1
      Fancy Visualization
    CONS OF CONCOURSE
    • 2
      Fail forward instead of rollback pattern

    related Concourse posts

    We use Docker for our #DeploymentWorkflow along with Concourse for build pipelines and Ansible for deployment together with Vault to manage secrets.

    See more
    Vijay Kumar Reddy Tamalampudi
    Shared insights
    on
    ConcourseConcourseKubernetesKubernetes

    I wanna develop a video processing pipeline for an open source organization the pipeline consists of fixing video meta-data, transcoding, uploading to CDN, and uploading to YouTube. What do you guys think is a better way to do this, Kubernetes or Concourse?

    See more
    Codefresh logo

    Codefresh

    62
    47
    CI/CD Tailor-Made For Docker
    62
    47
    PROS OF CODEFRESH
    • 11
      Fastest and easiest way to work with Docker
    • 7
      Great support/fast builds/awesome ui
    • 6
      Great onboarding
    • 5
      Freestyle build steps to support custom CI/CD scripting
    • 4
      Robust feature-preview/qa environments on-demand
    • 4
      Easy setup
    • 2
      Kubernetes Integration
    • 2
      Codefresh Runner for supporting hybrid infra
    • 2
      GitOps friendly
    • 2
      Firendly API
    • 2
      Slack Integration
    CONS OF CODEFRESH
    • 1
      Questionable product quality and stability
    • 1
      Expensive compared to alternatives

    related Codefresh posts