CircleCI vs Go.CD

Overview

CircleCI

Stacks14.5K

Followers7.1K

Votes974

GoCD

Stacks205

Followers325

Votes207

GitHub Stars7.3K

Forks980

CircleCI vs Go.CD: What are the differences?

<Write Introduction here>

Scalability: CircleCI is known for its scalability, allowing users to easily scale their builds by adding more compute resources, while Go.CD might have limitations in scaling due to its architecture. This makes CircleCI a better choice for larger projects with complex build requirements.
Ease of Use: CircleCI is praised for its user-friendly interface, making it easy for developers to set up and manage their CI/CD pipelines without much complexity. On the other hand, Go.CD may have a steeper learning curve due to its more configuration-heavy approach, which might require more time and effort to get accustomed to.
Customizability: With CircleCI, users have the flexibility to customize their build pipelines using a wide range of available plugins and integrations to suit their specific needs. In contrast, Go.CD offers a more rigid structure, which may limit the level of customization users can achieve in their CI/CD processes.
Community Support: CircleCI boasts a large and active community of users and contributors, providing extensive documentation, tutorials, and community forums for users to get help and support when needed. Go.CD, while also supported by a community, may not have the same level of widespread adoption and community engagement as CircleCI.
Pricing Structure: CircleCI offers a variety of pricing plans, including a free tier for small projects, making it accessible to individuals and small teams. In comparison, Go.CD may have a more complex pricing structure or fewer options for users to choose from, potentially making it less cost-effective for certain users.
Integration Ecosystem: CircleCI has a robust ecosystem of integrations with popular tools and services, allowing users to seamlessly connect their CI/CD workflows with other tools in their development stack. Go.CD, while also offering integrations, may have a more limited set of options available, which could impact the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the CI/CD process.

In Summary, CircleCI and Go.CD differ in terms of scalability, ease of use, customizability, community support, pricing structure, and integration ecosystem, making each suitable for different use cases based on specific needs and preferences.

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

Advice on CircleCI, GoCD

Somnath

Engineering Leader at Altimetrik Corp.

Jun 25, 2020

Needs adviceon

CircleCI

Drone.io

GitHub Actions

I am in the process of evaluating CircleCI, Drone.io, and GitHub Actions to cover my #CI/ #CD needs. I would appreciate your advice on comparative study w.r.t. attributes like language-Inclusive support, code-base integration, performance, cost, maintenance, support, ease of use, ability to deal with big projects, etc. based on actual industry experience.

Thanks in advance!

1.82M views1.82M

Comments

Phillip

Developer at Coach Align

Mar 18, 2021

Decided

The introduction of Orbs a few years ago has really streamlined CircleCI configuration files and made them really easy to work with. Haven't tried GitHub Actions and decided to go with what was familiar instead of trying something new. Tried to make AWS Codepipeline work a few years back on different projects and found it to be incredibly frustrating, lacking support for some of the most basic features and use cases.

41.1k views41.1k

Comments

Felipe

May 24, 2020

Needs advice

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.

198k views198k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

CircleCI	GoCD
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.	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.
Language-Inclusive Support;Custom Environments;Flexible Resource Allocation;SSH Or Local Builds For Easy Debugging;Improved Caching;Unmatched Security;Parallelism;Insights	Model complex workflows with dependency management and parallel execution; Easy to pass once-built binaries between stages; Visibility into your end-to-end workflow. Track a change from commit to deploy at a glance; Manual triggers allow deployment any version at anytime. And it's securable and auditable; Run tests written in most languages or frameworks, provides informative testing report; Compare both files and commit messages across any two arbitrary builds; Eliminate Bottlenecks by providing trivial parallel execution across pipelines, platforms, versions, branches, etc.; Easily reuse pipeline configurations via template system.
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 7.3K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 980
Stacks 14.5K	Stacks 205
Followers 7.1K	Followers 325
Votes 974	Votes 207
Pros & Cons
Pros 226 Github integration 177 Easy setup 153 Fast builds 94 Competitively priced 74 Slack integration Cons 12 Unstable 6 Scammy pricing structure 0 Aggressive Github permissions	Pros 32 Open source 27 Pipeline dependencies 25 Pipeline structures 22 Can run jobs in parallel 20 Very flexible Cons 2 Lack of plugins 2 Horrible ui 1 No support
Integrations
dotCloud GitHub Xcode Azure Container Service Slack Heroku JavaScript Node.js Python Amazon EC2	Docker Kubernetes Slack

What are some alternatives to CircleCI, GoCD?

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.

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.

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.

Snap CI

Snap CI is a cloud-based continuous integration & continuous deployment tool with powerful deployment pipelines. Integrates seamlessly with GitHub and provides fast feedback so you can deploy with ease.

Appveyor

AppVeyor aims to give powerful Continuous Integration and Deployment tools to every .NET developer without the hassle of setting up and maintaining their own build server.

Related Comparisons

CircleCI vs Go.CD: What are the differences?

<Write Introduction here>

Scalability: CircleCI is known for its scalability, allowing users to easily scale their builds by adding more compute resources, while Go.CD might have limitations in scaling due to its architecture. This makes CircleCI a better choice for larger projects with complex build requirements.
Ease of Use: CircleCI is praised for its user-friendly interface, making it easy for developers to set up and manage their CI/CD pipelines without much complexity. On the other hand, Go.CD may have a steeper learning curve due to its more configuration-heavy approach, which might require more time and effort to get accustomed to.
Customizability: With CircleCI, users have the flexibility to customize their build pipelines using a wide range of available plugins and integrations to suit their specific needs. In contrast, Go.CD offers a more rigid structure, which may limit the level of customization users can achieve in their CI/CD processes.
Community Support: CircleCI boasts a large and active community of users and contributors, providing extensive documentation, tutorials, and community forums for users to get help and support when needed. Go.CD, while also supported by a community, may not have the same level of widespread adoption and community engagement as CircleCI.
Pricing Structure: CircleCI offers a variety of pricing plans, including a free tier for small projects, making it accessible to individuals and small teams. In comparison, Go.CD may have a more complex pricing structure or fewer options for users to choose from, potentially making it less cost-effective for certain users.
Integration Ecosystem: CircleCI has a robust ecosystem of integrations with popular tools and services, allowing users to seamlessly connect their CI/CD workflows with other tools in their development stack. Go.CD, while also offering integrations, may have a more limited set of options available, which could impact the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the CI/CD process.

CircleCI vs Go.CD

Overview