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.
140
340
+ 1
16

What is Jenkins X and what are its top alternatives?

Jenkins X is a CI/CD solution for modern cloud applications on Kubernetes
Jenkins X is a tool in the Continuous Integration category of a tech stack.
Jenkins X is an open source tool with 4.1K GitHub stars and 750 GitHub forks. Here’s a link to Jenkins X's open source repository on GitHub

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

44.4K
36.9K
2.2K
An extendable open source continuous integration server
44.4K
36.9K
+ 1
2.2K
PROS OF JENKINS
  • 521
    Hosted internally
  • 465
    Free open source
  • 314
    Great to build, deploy or launch anything async
  • 243
    Tons of integrations
  • 210
    Rich set of plugins with good documentation
  • 109
    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
    Continuous Integration
  • 8
    Great flexibility
  • 8
    Git and Maven integration is better
  • 6
    Github integration
  • 6
    100% free and open source
  • 6
    Slack Integration (plugin)
  • 5
    Easy customisation
  • 5
    Self-hosted GitLab Integration (plugin)
  • 4
    Docker support
  • 3
    Excellent docker integration
  • 3
    Platform idnependency
  • 3
    Fast builds
  • 3
    Pipeline API
  • 2
    Customizable
  • 2
    Can be run as a Docker container
  • 2
    It`w worked
  • 2
    JOBDSL
  • 2
    Hosted Externally
  • 2
    It's Everywhere
  • 2
    AWS Integration
  • 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
    Limited abilities with declarative pipelines
  • 6
    Plugins compatibility issues
  • 5
    Lack of support
  • 4
    No YAML syntax
  • 2
    Too tied to plugins versions

related Jenkins posts

Tymoteusz Paul
Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 4.8M 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

196
296
9
Multi-cloud continuous delivery platform for releasing software changes with high velocity and confidence
196
296
+ 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
Blue Ocean logo

Blue Ocean

87
153
7
A reboot of the Jenkins CI/CD User Experience
87
153
+ 1
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

    1.9K
    1.3K
    71
    GitLab integrated CI to test, build and deploy your code
    1.9K
    1.3K
    + 1
    71
    PROS OF GITLAB CI
    • 22
      Robust CI with awesome Docker support
    • 12
      Simple configuration
    • 8
      All in one solution
    • 6
      Source Control and CI in one place
    • 5
      Easy to configure own build server i.e. GitLab-Runner
    • 5
      Integrated with VCS on commit
    • 4
      Free and open source
    • 2
      Hosted internally
    • 1
      Pipeline could be started manually
    • 1
      Built-in support of Review Apps
    • 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 Docker Registry
    • 1
      Built-in support of Kubernetes
    CONS OF GITLAB CI
    • 1
      Works best with GitLab repositories

    related GitLab CI posts

    Joshua Dean Küpper
    CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 18 upvotes · 309.2K 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
    Sebastian Dellwig
    Tech Lead at Porsche Digital GmbH · | 6 upvotes · 141.7K views
    Shared insights
    on
    GitLab CIGitLab CICircleCICircleCICodeshipCodeship

    We are using GitLab CI and were very happy with it. The integration of all tools like CI/CD, tickets, etc makes it very easy to stay on top of things. But be aware, Gitlab currently does not have iOS build support. So if you want to exchange that for CircleCI / Codeship to have to invest some effort. We are using a managed Mac OS device and installed the Gitlab runner there, to have iOS builds.

    See more
    Red Hat OpenShift logo

    Red Hat OpenShift

    1.1K
    1.2K
    481
    Red Hat's free Platform as a Service (PaaS) for hosting Java, PHP, Ruby, Python, Node.js, and Perl apps
    1.1K
    1.2K
    + 1
    481
    PROS OF RED HAT OPENSHIFT
    • 97
      Good free plan
    • 61
      Open Source
    • 45
      Easy setup
    • 41
      Nodejs support
    • 40
      Well documented
    • 31
      Custom domains
    • 27
      Mongodb support
    • 26
      Clean and simple architecture
    • 24
      PHP support
    • 20
      Customizable environments
    • 10
      Ability to run CRON jobs
    • 8
      Easier than Heroku for a WordPress blog
    • 6
      PostgreSQL support
    • 6
      Easy deployment
    • 6
      Autoscaling
    • 6
      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
    • 2
      Golang support
    • 2
      Overly complicated and over engineered in majority of e
    • 2
      Its free and offer custom domain usage
    • 1
      No credit card needed
    • 1
      Great free plan with excellent support
    • 1
      Meteor support
    • 1
      High Security
    • 1
      Logging & Metrics
    • 1
      because it is easy to manage
    • 1
      Autoscaling at a good price point
    • 1
      Easy setup and great customer 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 · | 39 upvotes · 4.4M 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

    43.9K
    36.2K
    2.3K
    Open source self-hosted Git management software
    43.9K
    36.2K
    + 1
    2.3K
    PROS OF GITLAB
    • 492
      Self hosted
    • 420
      Free
    • 334
      Has community edition
    • 238
      Easy setup
    • 238
      Familiar interface
    • 131
      Includes many features, including ci
    • 107
      Nice UI
    • 81
      Good integration with gitlabci
    • 53
      Simple setup
    • 33
      Has an official mobile app
    • 31
      Free private repository
    • 27
      Continuous Integration
    • 19
      Open source, great ui (like github)
    • 15
      Slack Integration
    • 11
      Full CI flow
    • 9
      Free and unlimited private git repos
    • 8
      User, group, and project access management is simple
    • 7
      Built-in CI
    • 7
      All in one (Git, CI, Agile..)
    • 7
      Intuitive UI
    • 4
      Both public and private Repositories
    • 3
      Mattermost Chat client
    • 3
      Integrated Docker Registry
    • 3
      Issue system
    • 2
      One-click install through DigitalOcean
    • 2
      Dockerized
    • 2
      Because is the best remote host for git repositories
    • 2
      Full DevOps suite with Git
    • 2
      Free private repos
    • 2
      Great for team collaboration
    • 2
      Unlimited free repos & collaborators
    • 2
      It's fully integrated
    • 2
      I like the its runners and executors feature
    • 2
      CI
    • 2
      So easy to use
    • 2
      It's powerful source code management tool
    • 2
      Excellent
    • 2
      Build/pipeline definition alongside code
    • 2
      Security and Stable
    • 2
      Low maintenance cost due omnibus-deployment
    • 2
      On-premises
    • 1
      Multilingual interface
    • 1
      Kubernetes integration with GitLab CI
    • 1
      Review Apps feature
    • 1
      Powerful software planning and maintaining tools
    • 1
      Groups of groups
    • 1
      Built-in Docker Registry
    • 1
      Beautiful
    • 1
      Wounderful
    • 1
      Opensource
    • 1
      Not Microsoft Owned
    • 1
      Many private repo
    • 1
      Published IP list for whitelisting (gl-infra#434)
    • 1
      The dashboard with deployed environments
    • 1
      HipChat intergration
    • 1
      Kubernetes Integration
    • 1
      Native CI
    • 1
      Powerful Continuous Integration System
    • 1
      It includes everything I need, all packaged with docker
    • 0
      Supports Radius/Ldap & Browser Code Edits
    CONS OF GITLAB
    • 27
      Slow ui performance
    • 7
      Introduce breaking bugs every release
    • 5
      Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting)
    • 1
      Built-in Docker Registry
    • 0
      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) · | 18 upvotes · 309.2K 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

    231
    330
    49
    Pipeline-based CI system written in Go
    231
    330
    + 1
    49
    PROS OF CONCOURSE
    • 14
      Real pipelines
    • 9
      Containerised builds
    • 9
      Flexible engine
    • 5
      Fast
    • 3
      Open source
    • 3
      Simple configuration management
    • 3
      No Snowflakes
    • 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
    Codefresh logo

    Codefresh

    51
    97
    47
    CI/CD Tailor-Made For Docker
    51
    97
    + 1
    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
      Easy setup
    • 4
      Robust feature-preview/qa environments on-demand
    • 2
      Firendly API
    • 2
      Slack Integration
    • 2
      Kubernetes Integration
    • 2
      Codefresh Runner for supporting hybrid infra
    • 2
      GitOps friendly
    CONS OF CODEFRESH
    • 1
      Questionable product quality and stability
    • 1
      Expensive compared to alternatives

    related Codefresh posts