Bamboo vs Hudson

Overview

Bamboo

Stacks504

Followers549

Votes17

Hudson

Stacks12

Followers18

Votes0

Bamboo vs Hudson: What are the differences?

# Key Differences Between Bamboo and Hudson

Bamboo is a continuous integration and deployment tool developed by Atlassian, while Hudson is an open-source continuous integration tool. One major difference between the two is that Bamboo offers tighter integration with other Atlassian products like Jira and Bitbucket, providing a seamless end-to-end software development experience.
  
1. **Scalability**: Bamboo is known for its scalability, supporting large-scale deployments and providing better performance compared to Hudson, making it a preferred choice for organizations with complex continuous integration needs.
  
2. **User Interface**: Bamboo boasts a more modern and user-friendly interface, with advanced visualization and reporting capabilities, where Hudson has a straightforward and simpler interface that may be more suitable for some users.
 
3. **Plugin Ecosystem**: Bamboo has a vast array of plugins available through the Atlassian Marketplace, allowing users to customize and extend the functionality of the tool. On the other hand, Hudson also has a plugin ecosystem but may not offer as many options as Bamboo.
 
4. **Cost**: Bamboo is a commercial tool that comes with a price tag, while Hudson is open-source and free to use, making it a more cost-effective option for budget-conscious organizations.
  
5. **Support and Maintenance**: With Bamboo being a commercial product, users have access to official support from Atlassian, including regular updates and maintenance. In contrast, Hudson relies on its community for support and may not always provide the same level of assistance as Bamboo.

6. **Integration with CI/CD Pipelines**: Bamboo provides seamless integration with various CI/CD tools and services, allowing for easier automation and orchestration of the software development process. While Hudson also supports CI/CD pipelines, Bamboo's integration capabilities are considered more robust and comprehensive.

In Summary, Bamboo and Hudson differ in terms of scalability, user interface, plugin ecosystem, cost, support and maintenance, and integration with CI/CD pipelines.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

Bamboo	Hudson
Focus on coding and count on Bamboo as your CI and build server! Create multi-stage build plans, set up triggers to start builds upon commits, and assign agents to your critical builds and deployments.	It monitors the execution of repeated jobs, such as building a software project or jobs run by cron. Among those things, currently it focuses on the two jobs
-	Easy installation; Easy configuration; Change set support; Permanent links; RSS/E-mail/IM Integration; After-the-fact tagging; JUnit/TestNG test reporting; Distributed builds; File fingerprinting; Plugin Support
Statistics
Stacks 504	Stacks 12
Followers 549	Followers 18
Votes 17	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 10 Integrates with other Atlassian tools 4 Great notification scheme 2 Great UI 1 Has Deployment Projects Cons 6 Expensive 1 Low community support 1 Bad integration with docker 1 Bad UI	No community feedback yet
Integrations
Confluence Jira Bitbucket HipChat	JavaScript Java HTML5

What are some alternatives to Bamboo, Hudson?

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.

Travis CI

Free for open source projects, our CI environment provides multiple runtimes (e.g. Node.js or PHP versions), data stores and so on. Because of this, hosting your project on travis-ci.com means you can effortlessly test your library or applications against multiple runtimes and data stores without even having all of them installed locally.

Codeship

Codeship runs your automated tests and configured deployment when you push to your repository. It takes care of managing and scaling the infrastructure so that you are able to test and release more frequently and get faster feedback for building the product your users need.

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.

TeamCity

TeamCity is a user-friendly continuous integration (CI) server for professional developers, build engineers, and DevOps. It is trivial to setup and absolutely free for small teams and open source projects.

Drone.io

Drone is a hosted continuous integration service. It enables you to conveniently set up projects to automatically build, test, and deploy as you make changes to your code. Drone integrates seamlessly with Github, Bitbucket and Google Code as well as third party services such as Heroku, Dotcloud, Google AppEngine and more.

wercker

Wercker is a CI/CD developer automation platform designed for Microservices & Container Architecture.

GoCD

GoCD is an open source continuous delivery server created by ThoughtWorks. GoCD offers business a first-class build and deployment engine for complete control and visibility.

Shippable

Shippable is a SaaS platform that lets you easily add Continuous Integration/Deployment to your Github and BitBucket repositories. It is lightweight, super simple to setup, and runs your builds and tests faster than any other service.

Buildkite

CI and build automation tool that combines the power of your own build infrastructure with the convenience of a managed, centralized web UI. Used by Shopify, Basecamp, Digital Ocean, Venmo, Cochlear, Bugsnag and more.

Related Comparisons

Bamboo vs Hudson: What are the differences?

# Key Differences Between Bamboo and Hudson

Bamboo is a continuous integration and deployment tool developed by Atlassian, while Hudson is an open-source continuous integration tool. One major difference between the two is that Bamboo offers tighter integration with other Atlassian products like Jira and Bitbucket, providing a seamless end-to-end software development experience.
  
1. **Scalability**: Bamboo is known for its scalability, supporting large-scale deployments and providing better performance compared to Hudson, making it a preferred choice for organizations with complex continuous integration needs.
  
2. **User Interface**: Bamboo boasts a more modern and user-friendly interface, with advanced visualization and reporting capabilities, where Hudson has a straightforward and simpler interface that may be more suitable for some users.
 
3. **Plugin Ecosystem**: Bamboo has a vast array of plugins available through the Atlassian Marketplace, allowing users to customize and extend the functionality of the tool. On the other hand, Hudson also has a plugin ecosystem but may not offer as many options as Bamboo.
 
4. **Cost**: Bamboo is a commercial tool that comes with a price tag, while Hudson is open-source and free to use, making it a more cost-effective option for budget-conscious organizations.
  
5. **Support and Maintenance**: With Bamboo being a commercial product, users have access to official support from Atlassian, including regular updates and maintenance. In contrast, Hudson relies on its community for support and may not always provide the same level of assistance as Bamboo.

6. **Integration with CI/CD Pipelines**: Bamboo provides seamless integration with various CI/CD tools and services, allowing for easier automation and orchestration of the software development process. While Hudson also supports CI/CD pipelines, Bamboo's integration capabilities are considered more robust and comprehensive.

In Summary, Bamboo and Hudson differ in terms of scalability, user interface, plugin ecosystem, cost, support and maintenance, and integration with CI/CD pipelines.

Bamboo vs Hudson

Overview