CircleCI vs Codeship

Get Advice Icon

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

CircleCI
CircleCI

3.6K
2.1K
+ 1
941
Codeship
Codeship

938
621
+ 1
1.4K
Add tool

CircleCI vs Codeship: What are the differences?

CircleCI: Automate your development process quickly, safely, and at scale. 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; Codeship: A Continuous Integration Platform in the cloud. 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 and Codeship can be primarily classified as "Continuous Integration" tools.

Some of the features offered by CircleCI are:

  • Language-Inclusive Support
  • Custom Environments
  • Flexible Resource Allocation

On the other hand, Codeship provides the following key features:

  • Run you automated tests | Easily set up Codeship with Github or Bitbucket and trigger your automated tests with a simple push to your repository.
  • 100 builds & 5 private projects free per month.
  • Free for OSS.

"Github integration", "Easy setup" and "Fast builds" are the key factors why developers consider CircleCI; whereas "Simple deployments", "Easy setup" and "Github integration" are the primary reasons why Codeship is favored.

According to the StackShare community, CircleCI has a broader approval, being mentioned in 943 company stacks & 388 developers stacks; compared to Codeship, which is listed in 277 company stacks and 82 developer stacks.

- No public GitHub repository available -
- No public GitHub repository available -

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.

What is 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.
Get Advice Icon

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

Why do developers choose CircleCI?
Why do developers choose Codeship?

Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions

What companies use CircleCI?
What companies use Codeship?

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

What tools integrate with CircleCI?
What tools integrate with Codeship?

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

What are some alternatives to CircleCI and Codeship?
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.
Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps provides unlimited private Git hosting, cloud build for continuous integration, agile planning, and release management for continuous delivery to the cloud and on-premises. Includes broad IDE support.
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.
CloudBees
Enables organizations to build, test and deploy applications to production, utilizing continuous delivery practices. They are focused solely on Jenkins as a tool for continuous delivery both on-premises and in the cloud.
See all alternatives
Decisions about CircleCI and Codeship
Codeship
Codeship
Semaphore
Semaphore
Slack
Slack
GitHub
GitHub

When it comes to continuous Integration services, the choice is hard. There are several solutions available and it looks like the dev scene is very split. We've read and reviewed several solutions and we ended up making the choice between Codeship and Semaphore . Although Semaphore is used by slightly more developers, we've experienced a faster and easy flow using Codeship. Both do integrate Slack and GitHub very well, so this is not a point to set them apart. Both have a complex pricing system that is not that easy to calculate and predict. However, out in the wild, we found Codeship to have a better price point at heavy use.

See more
Tymoteusz Paul
Tymoteusz Paul
Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 15 upvotes · 363.2K views
Vagrant
Vagrant
VirtualBox
VirtualBox
Ansible
Ansible
Elasticsearch
Elasticsearch
Kibana
Kibana
Logstash
Logstash
TeamCity
TeamCity
Jenkins
Jenkins
Slack
Slack
Apache Maven
Apache Maven
Vault
Vault
Git
Git
Docker
Docker
CircleCI
CircleCI
LXC
LXC
Amazon EC2
Amazon EC2

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
CircleCI
CircleCI
Travis CI
Travis CI

I initially chose CircleCI for a personal project because I was not satisified with using Travis CI in the past. When it came time to develop my CI/CD config on Circle, I was pleasantly surprised with the fantastic documentation, invaluable collection of example configs and helpful support provided. The free tier they provide is quite robust for most small projects and the platform is updated frequently with nice features.

Areas where CircleCI could improve:

  • the UI is a bit slow (you can feel the local machine straining to load all the code) and it is not as intuitive as it could be
  • many UI elements receive updates and/or changes that are not always reflected in the current docs
See more
Sebastian Gębski
Sebastian Gębski
CTO at Shedul/Fresha · | 4 upvotes · 256.7K views
atFresha EngineeringFresha Engineering
CircleCI
CircleCI
Jenkins
Jenkins
Git
Git
GitHub
GitHub
New Relic
New Relic
AppSignal
AppSignal
Sentry
Sentry
Logentries
Logentries

Regarding Continuous Integration - we've started with something very easy to set up - CircleCI , but with time we're adding more & more complex pipelines - we use Jenkins to configure & run