Get Advice Icon

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Bazel

307
574
+ 1
133
CircleCI

12.9K
7.1K
+ 1
974
Add tool

Bazel vs CircleCI: What are the differences?

Introduction:

In this markdown document, we will be discussing the key differences between Bazel and CircleCI. Bazel and CircleCI are both popular tools used in the software development lifecycle but serve different purposes. Bazel is a build automation tool that focuses on build optimization, while CircleCI is a continuous integration and continuous deployment (CI/CD) platform. Below, we will explore the key differences between these two tools.

  1. Build Optimization: One of the significant differences between Bazel and CircleCI is their primary focus. Bazel is designed explicitly for build optimization, allowing developers to efficiently build, test, and deploy large-scale projects. On the other hand, CircleCI is a CI/CD platform that helps automate the entire process of building, testing, and deploying software projects, including integration with various development tools and environments.

  2. Build Caching: Bazel provides powerful build caching capabilities, which allow for faster build times by reusing compiled artifacts and dependencies across builds. This caching mechanism improves incremental builds and reduces build times, especially for large projects. In contrast, CircleCI also offers build caching, but the caching mechanism may vary depending on the specific configuration and setup of the project.

  3. Flexibility and Extensibility: Bazel offers a high degree of flexibility and extensibility, making it suitable for complex software projects with different programming languages, platforms, and build configurations. It supports multiple languages, including Java, C++, Python, and more. Bazel provides a rule-based approach that allows developers to define their own custom rules and build configurations. CircleCI, while also flexible, focuses more on providing a streamlined CI/CD experience rather than extensive customizability.

  4. Integration with Version Control Systems: Bazel integrates well with various version control systems like Git, allowing for seamless integration into existing software development workflows. It supports features like distributed caching, remote execution, and intelligent change detection, which can enhance the overall build process efficiency. CircleCI also has similar integrations with version control systems but offers a broader range of integrations with various tools and services used in the CI/CD pipeline.

  5. Orchestration and Workflow: Bazel provides a sophisticated and fine-grained build orchestration mechanism that allows developers to define dependencies, target-specific builds, and parallel execution of tasks. It enables efficient distributed builds with options for remote caching and parallelization. CircleCI also offers powerful workflow management capabilities, allowing developers to define complex build pipelines with user-defined jobs, sequential and parallel steps, and integration with external services.

  6. Pricing and Deployment Options: The pricing models and deployment options for Bazel and CircleCI differ. Bazel is an open-source project supported by Google with no direct costs associated with it. It can be self-hosted or used as a service on platforms like Google Cloud. On the other hand, CircleCI offers both free and paid plans, with varying levels of features and resources. CircleCI can be used as a cloud service or as a self-hosted solution.

In summary, Bazel primarily focuses on build optimization, offers flexible and extensible build configurations, and integrates well with version control systems. CircleCI, however, is a comprehensive CI/CD platform that automates the entire build, test, and deployment process, provides flexible workflow management, and offers a range of integrations with different development tools and services.

Advice on Bazel and CircleCI
Needs advice
on
CircleCICircleCIGitLab CIGitLab CI
and
Jenkins XJenkins X

We are a mid-size startup running Scala apps. Moving from Jenkins/EC2 to Spinnaker/EKS and looking for a tool to cover our CI/CD needs. Our code lives on GitHub, artifacts in nexus, images in ECR.

Drone is out, GitHub actions are being considered along with Circle CI and GitLab CI.

We primarily need:

  • Fast SBT builds (caching)
  • Low maintenance overhead (ideally serverless)
  • Everything as code
  • Ease of use
See more
Replies (3)
Glenn Gillen
Recommends
on
BuildkiteBuildkite

I think I've tried most of the CI tools out there at some point. It took me a while to get around to Buildkite because at first I didn't see much point given it seemed like you had to run the agent yourself. Eventually it dawned on me why this approach was more ingenious than I realised:

Running my app in a production (or production-like) environment was already a solved problem, because everything was already in some form of "everything as code". Having a test environment where the only difference was adding the Buildkite agent was a trivial addition.

It means that dev/test/prod parity is simple to achieve and maintain. It's also proven to be much easier to support than trying to deal with the problems that come with trying to force an app to fit into the nuances and constraints that are imposed by the containers/runtime of a CI service. When you completely control all of the environment the tests are running in you define those constraints too. It's been a great balance between a managed service and the flexibility of running it yourself.

And while none of my needs have hit the scale of Shopify (I saw one of their engineers speak about it at a conference once, I can't find the video now though 😞) it's good to know I can scale out my worker nodes to hundreds of thousands of workers to reduce the time it takes for my tests to run.

See more
Recommends
on
jFrogjFrog

I would recommend you to consider the JFrog Platform that includes JFrog Pipelines - it will allow you to manage the full artifact life cycle for your sbt, docker and other technologies, and automate all of your CI and CD using cloud native declarative yaml pipelines. Will integrate smoothly with all your other toolset.

See more
Estu Fardani
Recommends
on
GitLab CIGitLab CI

more configurable to setup ci/cd: * It can provide caching when build sbt, just add this section to yml file * Easy to use, many documentation

Weakness: * Need use gitlab as repository to bring more powerful configuration

See more
Needs advice
on
JenkinsJenkinsTravis CITravis CI
and
CircleCICircleCI

From a StackShare Community member: "Currently we use Travis CI and have optimized it as much as we can so our builds are fairly quick. Our boss is all about redundancy so we are looking for another solution to fall back on in case Travis goes down and/or jacks prices way up (they were recently acquired). Could someone recommend which CI we should go with and if they have time, an explanation of how they're different?"

See more
Replies (6)
Dustin Falgout
Senior Developer at Elegant Themes · | 13 upvotes · 593.8K views

We use CircleCI because of the better value it provides in its plans. I'm sure we could have used Travis just as easily but we found CircleCI's pricing to be more reasonable. In the two years since we signed up, the service has improved. CircleCI is always innovating and iterating on their platform. We have been very satisfied.

See more
Peter Thomas
Distinguished Engineer at Intuit · | 9 upvotes · 909.5K views
Recommends
on
Travis CITravis CI
at

As the maintainer of the Karate DSL open-source project - I found Travis CI very easy to integrate into the GitHub workflow and it has been steady sailing for more than 2 years now ! It works well for Java / Apache Maven projects and we were able to configure it to use the latest Oracle JDK as per our needs. Thanks to the Travis CI team for this service to the open-source community !

See more
Recommends
on
Google Cloud BuildGoogle Cloud Build

I use Google Cloud Build because it's my first foray into the CICD world(loving it so far), and I wanted to work with something GCP native to avoid giving permissions to other SaaS tools like CircleCI and Travis CI.

I really like it because it's free for the first 120 minutes, and it's one of the few CICD tools that enterprises are open to using since it's contained within GCP.

One of the unique things is that it has the Kaniko cache, which speeds up builds by creating intermediate layers within the docker image vs. pushing the full thing from the start. Helpful when you're installing just a few additional dependencies.

Feel free to checkout an example: Cloudbuild Example

See more
Recommends
on
Travis CITravis CI

I use Travis CI because of various reasons - 1. Cloud based system so no dedicated server required, and you do not need to administrate it. 2. Easy YAML configuration. 3. Supports Major Programming Languages. 4. Support of build matrix 6. Supports AWS, Azure, Docker, Heroku, Google Cloud, Github Pages, PyPi and lot more. 7. Slack Notifications.

See more
Oded Arbel
Recommends
on
GitLab CIGitLab CI

You are probably looking at another hosted solution: Jenkins is a good tool but it way too work intensive to be used as just a backup solution.

I have good experience with Circle-CI, Codeship, Drone.io and Travis (as well as problematic experiences with all of them), but my go-to tool is Gitlab CI: simple, powerful and if you have problems with their limitations or pricing, you can always install runners somewhere and use Gitlab just for scheduling and management. Even if you don't host your git repository at Gitlab, you can have Gitlab pull changes automatically from wherever you repo lives.

See more
Recommends
on
BuildkiteBuildkite

If you are considering Jenkins I would recommend at least checking out Buildkite. The agents are self-hosted (like Jenkins) but the interface is hosted for you. It meshes up some of the things I like about hosted services (pipeline definitions in YAML, managed interface and authentication) with things I like about Jenkins (local customizable agent images, secrets only on own instances, custom agent level scripts, sizing instances to your needs).

See more
Decisions about Bazel and CircleCI
Kirill Mikhailov

Jenkins is a friend of mine. 😀

There are not much space for Jenkins competitors for now from my point of view. With declarative pipelines now in place, its super easy to maintain them and create new ones(altho I prefer scripted still). Self-hosted, free, huge community makes it the top choice so honestly for me it was an easy pick.

See more

My website is brand new and one of the few requirements of testings I had to implement was code coverage. Never though it was so hard to implement using a #docker container. Given my lack of experience, every attempt I tried on making a simple code coverage test using the 4 combinations of #TravisCI, #CircleCi with #Coveralls, #Codecov I failed. The main problem was I was generating the .coverage file within the docker container and couldn't access it with #TravisCi or #CircleCi, every attempt to solve this problem seems to be very hacky and this was not the kind of complexity I want to introduce to my newborn website. This problem was solved using a specific action for #GitHubActions, it was a 3 line solution I had to put in my github workflow file and I was able to access the .coverage file from my docker container and get the coverage report with #Codecov.

See more

Buddy is one of the most easy-to-use tools for CI I ever met. When I needed to set up the pipeline I was really impressed with how easy it is to create it with Buddy with only a few moments. It's literally like: 1. Add repo 2. Click - Click - Click 3. You're done and your app is on prod :D The top feature that I've found is a simple integration with different notification channels - not only Slack (which is the one by default), but Telegram and Discord. The support is also neat - guys respond pretty quickly on even a small issue.

See more

We were long time users of TravisCI, but switched to CircleCI because of the better user interface and pricing. Version 2.0 has had a couple of trips and hiccups; but overall we've been very happy with the continuous integration it provides. Continuous Integration is a must-have for building software, and CircleCI continues to surprise as they roll out ideas and features. It's leading the industry in terms of innovation and new ideas, and it's exciting to see what new things they keep rolling out.

See more

Jenkins is a pretty flexible, complete tool. Especially I love the possibility to configure jobs as a code with Jenkins pipelines.

CircleCI is well suited for small projects where the main task is to run continuous integration as quickly as possible. Travis CI is recommended primarily for open-source projects that need to be tested in different environments.

And for something a bit larger I prefer to use Jenkins because it is possible to make serious system configuration thereby different plugins. In Jenkins, I can change almost anything. But if you want to start the CI chain as soon as possible, Jenkins may not be the right choice.

See more
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More
Pros of Bazel
Pros of CircleCI
  • 28
    Fast
  • 20
    Deterministic incremental builds
  • 17
    Correct
  • 16
    Multi-language
  • 14
    Enforces declared inputs/outputs
  • 10
    High-level build language
  • 9
    Scalable
  • 5
    Multi-platform support
  • 5
    Sandboxing
  • 4
    Dependency management
  • 2
    Windows Support
  • 2
    Flexible
  • 1
    Android Studio integration
  • 226
    Github integration
  • 177
    Easy setup
  • 153
    Fast builds
  • 94
    Competitively priced
  • 74
    Slack integration
  • 55
    Docker support
  • 45
    Awesome UI
  • 33
    Great customer support
  • 18
    Ios support
  • 14
    Hipchat integration
  • 13
    SSH debug access
  • 11
    Free for Open Source
  • 6
    Mobile support
  • 5
    Nodejs support
  • 5
    Bitbucket integration
  • 5
    YAML configuration
  • 4
    AWS CodeDeploy integration
  • 3
    Free for Github private repo
  • 3
    Great support
  • 2
    Clojurescript
  • 2
    Continuous Deployment
  • 2
    Parallelism
  • 2
    Clojure
  • 2
    OSX support
  • 2
    Simple, clean UI
  • 1
    Unstable
  • 1
    Ci
  • 1
    Favorite
  • 1
    Helpful documentation
  • 1
    Autoscaling
  • 1
    Extremely configurable
  • 1
    Works
  • 1
    Android support
  • 1
    Fair pricing
  • 1
    All inclusive testing
  • 1
    Japanese in rspec comment appears OK
  • 1
    Build PR Branch Only
  • 1
    So circular
  • 1
    Easy setup, easy to understand, fast and reliable
  • 1
    Parallel builds for slow test suites
  • 1
    Easy setup. 2.0 is fast!
  • 1
    Easy to deploy to private servers
  • 1
    Really easy to use
  • 0
    Stable

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Bazel
Cons of CircleCI
  • 3
    No Windows Support
  • 2
    Bad IntelliJ support
  • 1
    Poor windows support for some languages
  • 1
    Constant breaking changes
  • 1
    Learning Curve
  • 1
    Lack of Documentation
  • 12
    Unstable
  • 6
    Scammy pricing structure
  • 0
    Aggressive Github permissions

Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

837
988
3.3K
4.4K
2.5K
1.9K

What is Bazel?

Bazel is a build tool that builds code quickly and reliably. It is used to build the majority of Google's software, and thus it has been designed to handle build problems present in Google's development environment.

What is 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.

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Jobs that mention Bazel and CircleCI as a desired skillset
What companies use Bazel?
What companies use CircleCI?
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More

Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

What tools integrate with Bazel?
What tools integrate with CircleCI?

Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

Blog Posts

Mar 24 2021 at 12:57PM

Pinterest

GitJenkinsKafka+7
3
2251
GitJenkinsGroovy+4
4
2889
GitNode.jsFirebase+5
7
2446
GitGitHubPython+22
17
14343
What are some alternatives to Bazel and CircleCI?
Pants
Pants is a build system for Java, Scala and Python. It works particularly well for a source code repository that contains many distinct projects.
Webpack
A bundler for javascript and friends. Packs many modules into a few bundled assets. Code Splitting allows to load parts for the application on demand. Through "loaders" modules can be CommonJs, AMD, ES6 modules, CSS, Images, JSON, Coffeescript, LESS, ... and your custom stuff.
Ansible
Ansible is an IT automation tool. It can configure systems, deploy software, and orchestrate more advanced IT tasks such as continuous deployments or zero downtime rolling updates. Ansible’s goals are foremost those of simplicity and maximum ease of use.
Buck
Buck encourages the creation of small, reusable modules consisting of code and resources, and supports a variety of languages on many platforms.
CMake
It is used to control the software compilation process using simple platform and compiler independent configuration files, and generate native makefiles and workspaces that can be used in the compiler environment of the user's choice.
See all alternatives