Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Buildbot vs GitLab CI: What are the differences?
### Key Differences between Buildbot and GitLab CI
<Write Introduction here>
1. **Integration with Version Control Systems**: Buildbot offers integration with various version control systems like Git, Mercurial, and Subversion, while GitLab CI is tightly integrated with Git repositories, making it seamless for Git-based projects to set up CI/CD pipelines.
2. **User Interface**: Buildbot has a more minimalistic and basic web interface for monitoring builds, whereas GitLab CI provides a modern and feature-rich interface with detailed build logs, pipeline visualization, and easy navigation.
3. **Hosted vs. Self-hosted**: GitLab CI is part of the GitLab platform, which can be self-hosted or used on GitLab's cloud-based service, while Buildbot is primarily self-hosted, requiring users to set up and maintain their own infrastructure.
4. **Third-party Plugin Ecosystem**: Buildbot has a limited number of plugins available compared to GitLab CI, which has a vast ecosystem of community-contributed plugins and integrations with other tools and services.
5. **Scalability and Performance**: GitLab CI is known for its scalability, handling large projects and thousands of builds efficiently, while Buildbot may face challenges in handling huge workloads or scaling to enterprise-level CI/CD requirements.
6. **Built-in Features**: GitLab CI comes with built-in features like container registry, package registry, and Kubernetes integration for seamless deployment, which may need to be separately configured or integrated with Buildbot setups.
In Summary, the key differences between Buildbot and GitLab CI lie in their integration capabilities, user interface, hosting options, plugin ecosystems, scalability, performance, and built-in features.
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
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 ๐) 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.
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.
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
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.
Pros of Buildbot
- Highly configurable builds9
- Hosted internally5
- Beautiful waterfall5
- Free open source4
- Python3
- No external web fonts by default1
Pros of GitLab CI
- Robust CI with awesome Docker support22
- Simple configuration13
- All in one solution9
- Source Control and CI in one place7
- Integrated with VCS on commit5
- Free and open source5
- Easy to configure own build server i.e. GitLab-Runner5
- Hosted internally2
- Built-in Docker Registry1
- Built-in support of Review Apps1
- Pipeline could be started manually1
- Enable or disable pipeline by using env variables1
- Gitlab templates could be shared across logical group1
- Easy to setup the dedicated runner to particular job1
- Built-in support of Kubernetes1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Buildbot
Cons of GitLab CI
- Works best with GitLab repositories2
