Alternatives to phing logo

Alternatives to phing

Jenkins, Deployer, Composer, Apache Ant, and Make are the most popular alternatives and competitors to phing.
48
10
+ 1
0

What is phing and what are its top alternatives?

It is not GNU make; it's a PHP project build system or build tool based on Apache Ant. You can do anything with it that you could do with a traditional build system like GNU make, and its use of simple XML build files and extensible PHP 'task' classes make it an easy-to-use and highly flexible build framework.
phing is a tool in the Package Managers category of a tech stack.
phing is an open source tool with 1.2K GitHub stars and 320 GitHub forks. Here’s a link to phing's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to phing

  • 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. ...

  • Deployer
    Deployer

    A deployment tool written in PHP with support for popular frameworks out of the box ...

  • Composer
    Composer

    It is a tool for dependency management in PHP. It allows you to declare the libraries your project depends on and it will manage (install/update) them for you. ...

  • Apache Ant
    Apache Ant

    Ant is a Java-based build tool. In theory, it is kind of like Make, without Make's wrinkles and with the full portability of pure Java code. ...

  • Make
    Make

    The GNU Compiler Collection and GNU Toolchain (Binutils, GDB, GLIBC)

  • gulp
    gulp

    Build system automating tasks: minification and copying of all JavaScript files, static images. More capable of watching files to automatically rerun the task when a file changes. ...

  • 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. ...

  • GitHub
    GitHub

    GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together. ...

phing alternatives & related posts

Jenkins logo

Jenkins

58.5K
2.2K
An extendable open source continuous integration server
58.5K
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 · 10M 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
Deployer logo

Deployer

53
21
Deployment Tool for PHP
53
21
PROS OF DEPLOYER
  • 8
    Simply to use
  • 7
    Easy to customize
  • 6
    Easy setup
CONS OF DEPLOYER
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Deployer 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
    Composer logo

    Composer

    1.1K
    13
    Dependency Manager for PHP
    1.1K
    13
    PROS OF COMPOSER
    • 7
      Must have dependency manager for PHP
    • 3
      Centralized autoload.php
    • 3
      Large number of libraries
    CONS OF COMPOSER
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Composer posts

      Apache Ant logo

      Apache Ant

      181
      7
      Java based build tool
      181
      7
      PROS OF APACHE ANT
      • 4
        Flexible
      • 1
        Simple
      • 1
        Easy to learn
      • 1
        Easy to write own java-build-hooks
      CONS OF APACHE ANT
      • 1
        Slow
      • 1
        Old and not widely used anymore

      related Apache Ant posts

      Joshua Dean Küpper
      CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 2 upvotes · 339.4K views

      All Java-Projects are compiled using Apache Maven. We prefer it over Apache Ant and Gradle as it combines lightweightness with feature-richness and offers basically all we can imagine from a software project-management tool and more. We're open however to re-evaluate this decision in favor of Gradle or Bazel in the future if we feel like we're missing out on anything.

      See more
      Make logo

      Make

      302
      1
      The GNU Compiler Collection and GNU Toolchain (Binutils, GDB, GLIBC)
      302
      1
      PROS OF MAKE
      • 1
        No-nonsense approach to builds. Just works
      • 0
        One-line Execution
      CONS OF MAKE
        Be the first to leave a con

        related Make posts

        gulp logo

        gulp

        14.2K
        1.7K
        The streaming build system
        14.2K
        1.7K
        PROS OF GULP
        • 451
          Build speed
        • 277
          Readable
        • 244
          Code-over-configuration
        • 210
          Open source
        • 175
          Node streams
        • 107
          Intuitive
        • 83
          Lots of plugins
        • 66
          Works great with browserify
        • 45
          Easy to Learn
        • 17
          Laravel-elixir
        • 4
          build workflow
        • 3
          Simple & flexible
        • 3
          Great community
        • 2
          Stylus intergration
        • 2
          Clean Code
        • 2
          jade intergration
        • 0
          Well documented
        CONS OF GULP
          Be the first to leave a con

          related gulp posts

          In 2014, PagerDuty struggled with safely releasing reliable mobile applications to users due to some issues with how the code was being packaged and handled.

          PagerDuty’s mobile apps are hybrid and used Cordova to share code between platforms. Coding was straightforward but packaging was not, as a separated Gulp-based build process was also being used. The PagerDuty team took a page from Java and started creating software artifacts.

          Rather than checking in transformed code or publishing modules to NPM, the team started creating zipped-up build artifacts, which coincided perfectly with GitHub's Releases feature which arrived in 2013. So despite JavaScript lacking a standard packaged app format like a JAR, PagerDuty was still able to improve the build times and sizes of their mobile apps.

          See more
          Omid Farhang
          Sr. Full Stack Developer · | 12 upvotes · 149.5K views

          Developing static sites like a landing page for mobile app or just a personal resume using HTML5 and Bootstrap is a lot fun when you are using build tools like gulp . I made a personal resume using above tools and published them on GitHub Pages. It was fast and easy, Thanks to GitHub for the free service. All the JavaScript codes worked perfectly after being concat and minified and uglified by gulp and running perfectly on GitHub Pages. gulp created sitemap and inserted Google Analytics code into all pages and saved about 30% of images size by compressing them during build.

          See more
          Git logo

          Git

          298.1K
          6.6K
          Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
          298.1K
          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 · 11.7M 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 · 10M 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
          GitHub logo

          GitHub

          286.8K
          10.3K
          Powerful collaboration, review, and code management for open source and private development projects
          286.8K
          10.3K
          PROS OF GITHUB
          • 1.8K
            Open source friendly
          • 1.5K
            Easy source control
          • 1.3K
            Nice UI
          • 1.1K
            Great for team collaboration
          • 867
            Easy setup
          • 504
            Issue tracker
          • 487
            Great community
          • 483
            Remote team collaboration
          • 449
            Great way to share
          • 442
            Pull request and features planning
          • 147
            Just works
          • 132
            Integrated in many tools
          • 122
            Free Public Repos
          • 116
            Github Gists
          • 113
            Github pages
          • 83
            Easy to find repos
          • 62
            Open source
          • 60
            Easy to find projects
          • 60
            It's free
          • 56
            Network effect
          • 49
            Extensive API
          • 43
            Organizations
          • 42
            Branching
          • 34
            Developer Profiles
          • 32
            Git Powered Wikis
          • 30
            Great for collaboration
          • 24
            It's fun
          • 23
            Clean interface and good integrations
          • 22
            Community SDK involvement
          • 20
            Learn from others source code
          • 16
            Because: Git
          • 14
            It integrates directly with Azure
          • 10
            Standard in Open Source collab
          • 10
            Newsfeed
          • 8
            Fast
          • 8
            Beautiful user experience
          • 8
            It integrates directly with Hipchat
          • 7
            Easy to discover new code libraries
          • 6
            It's awesome
          • 6
            Smooth integration
          • 6
            Cloud SCM
          • 6
            Nice API
          • 6
            Graphs
          • 6
            Integrations
          • 5
            Hands down best online Git service available
          • 5
            Reliable
          • 5
            Quick Onboarding
          • 5
            CI Integration
          • 5
            Remarkable uptime
          • 4
            Security options
          • 4
            Loved by developers
          • 4
            Uses GIT
          • 4
            Free HTML hosting
          • 4
            Easy to use and collaborate with others
          • 4
            Version Control
          • 4
            Simple but powerful
          • 4
            Unlimited Public Repos at no cost
          • 3
            Nice to use
          • 3
            IAM
          • 3
            Ci
          • 3
            Easy deployment via SSH
          • 2
            Free private repos
          • 2
            Good tools support
          • 2
            All in one development service
          • 2
            Never dethroned
          • 2
            Easy source control and everything is backed up
          • 2
            Issues tracker
          • 2
            Self Hosted
          • 2
            IAM integration
          • 2
            Very Easy to Use
          • 2
            Easy to use
          • 2
            Leads the copycats
          • 2
            Free HTML hostings
          • 2
            Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects
          • 2
            Beautiful
          • 1
            Dasf
          • 1
            Profound
          CONS OF GITHUB
          • 55
            Owned by micrcosoft
          • 38
            Expensive for lone developers that want private repos
          • 15
            Relatively slow product/feature release cadence
          • 10
            API scoping could be better
          • 9
            Only 3 collaborators for private repos
          • 4
            Limited featureset for issue management
          • 3
            Does not have a graph for showing history like git lens
          • 2
            GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions
          • 1
            No multilingual interface
          • 1
            Takes a long time to commit
          • 1
            Expensive

          related GitHub 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

          Context: I wanted to create an end to end IoT data pipeline simulation in Google Cloud IoT Core and other GCP services. I never touched Terraform meaningfully until working on this project, and it's one of the best explorations in my development career. The documentation and syntax is incredibly human-readable and friendly. I'm used to building infrastructure through the google apis via Python , but I'm so glad past Sung did not make that decision. I was tempted to use Google Cloud Deployment Manager, but the templates were a bit convoluted by first impression. I'm glad past Sung did not make this decision either.

          Solution: Leveraging Google Cloud Build Google Cloud Run Google Cloud Bigtable Google BigQuery Google Cloud Storage Google Compute Engine along with some other fun tools, I can deploy over 40 GCP resources using Terraform!

          Check Out My Architecture: CLICK ME

          Check out the GitHub repo attached

          See more