CircleCI vs wercker: What are the differences?
Developers describe CircleCI as "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. On the other hand, wercker is detailed as "Build, test, and deploy container-native applications". Wercker is a CI/CD developer automation platform designed for Microservices & Container Architecture.
CircleCI and wercker belong to "Continuous Integration" category of the tech stack.
Some of the features offered by CircleCI are:
- Language-Inclusive Support
- Custom Environments
- Flexible Resource Allocation
On the other hand, wercker provides the following key features:
- Pipelines - Wercker's Pipelines enable developers to fully automate builds, tests and deployments with Docker as a first class citizen.
- Workflows - With Workflows: a collection of pipelines can be chained and triggered to achieve complex automation goals.
- Steps Store - A step is a self contained best practice for accomplishing a specific automation task. Build your own or help yourself to our community based store.
"Github integration" is the top reason why over 218 developers like CircleCI, while over 34 developers mention "Automatic Deployments" as the leading cause for choosing wercker.
Instacart, Lyft, and StackShare are some of the popular companies that use CircleCI, whereas wercker is used by FashionUnited, Hazeorid, and Wantedly. CircleCI has a broader approval, being mentioned in 943 company stacks & 388 developers stacks; compared to wercker, which is listed in 40 company stacks and 23 developer stacks.
What is CircleCI?
What is wercker?
Want advice about which of these to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using wercker?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
I use CircleCI as part of a cross platform mobile app to build and test the app as well as deploying .apk files to an s3 bucket.
Alongside CircleCI this repo also has a TravisCI setup for iOS. The CircleCI build has always been quicker and since moving from CircleCI v1 to CircleCI v2 it blows the TravisCI build out of the water. I'm really impressed with the performance gains from moving to v2. I'm pretty sure I could achieve similar results in Travis as well, but it was really easy to setup the Android CI build in Circle making use of Docker.
After trying several CI systems, we stuck with CircleCI because of the inference engine in CircleCI 1.0 made setup a breeze. We were up and running quickly. Builds are reliable, nicely integrated into GitHub, and anytime we've had a question, the support team was there to help. The 2.0 system provides Docker support and far more customization and is still fairly easy to set up with helpful documentation.
CircleCI has become our CI of choice. The UI is really good and it has all the integrations we need. The 2.0 upgrade was not yet possible for one of our projects due to outdated gems, however, I have been able to get it working for a different one.
It help us with the automated build and test and also provide us with the build artifacts which we can use for the deployment also give use archive for each of our build, this things save us alot of time and cost
We use CircleCI to deploy to server. It is much easier than other websites like Travis especially for the free tier. It is especially useful for open source projects that need private access behind the scenes.
We originally used CircleCI as our self-contained build system for our internal node modules. It was very easy to set up and configure. Unfortunately we ended up stepping away from it to Jenkins and then CodePipeline due to better integration with our various applications.
We prefer CircleCI because we care about testing our apps. We found it is better to invest the time writing rSPEC tests to ensure we don't insert any regression bugs with new branches. It's also nice to have a fully-automated deployment process from GitHub to Heroku.
Used for CI/CD for all proofs of concept and personal projects, because of ease of use, GitHub integrations, and free tier.
Also used for example repos hosted in GitHub, paired with Dependabot, so that example repo dependencies are kept up to date.
CircleCI is used as continues integration system for shiro and all of its modules.
It automatically deploys the latest GitHub commit to https://shiro.host/.
CircleCI will be used for deployment and continuous integration using a scripted configuration that deploys to Amazon EC2.