Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Jenkins vs Jest: What are the differences?
Key Difference 1: Jenkins and Jest Execution Environment Jenkins is a continuous integration and delivery tool that runs on a server or multiple servers, allowing for distributed execution. It is written in Java and provides a web-based interface for managing and monitoring builds. On the other hand, Jest is a testing framework specifically designed for JavaScript and React applications. It is executed within a Node.js environment and generally runs on a developer's local machine or in a CI/CD pipeline.
Key Difference 2: Testing Capabilities Jenkins is primarily used for automating build and deployment processes, while Jest is primarily designed for unit testing JavaScript code. Jenkins can execute various types of tests, including unit tests, integration tests, and end-to-end tests, using different testing tools or frameworks. Jest, on the other hand, provides built-in capabilities for running JavaScript unit tests, including powerful features like code coverage analysis and snapshot testing.
Key Difference 3: Test Configuration and Setup In Jenkins, test configurations are defined using a Jenkinsfile or through a graphical user interface, allowing users to define build pipelines and specify test commands or scripts. Jenkins provides flexibility in configuring test environments, allowing users to define and manage dependencies, plugins, and build tools. Jest, on the other hand, uses a configuration file (usually named "jest.config.js") to define the test environment, test match patterns, and other Jest-specific settings. It offers a simple setup process and requires less manual configuration.
Key Difference 4: Integration with CI/CD Pipelines Jenkins is widely used as a CI/CD tool and integrates with various version control systems, build tools, and deployment platforms. It provides extensive integration capabilities, allowing users to trigger tests based on code changes, schedule builds at specific times, and automatically deploy applications. Jest, on the other hand, is commonly integrated into CI/CD pipelines using Jenkins or other CI/CD tools. It can be easily executed as part of the build or test stage in a pipeline.
Key Difference 5: Community and Ecosystem Jenkins has a vast and active community of users and contributors, with a wide range of plugins and extensions available for enhancing its functionality. It offers great flexibility and can be customized to meet specific requirements. Jest, on the other hand, is built and maintained by Facebook and has gained popularity within the JavaScript and React development community. It has a focused ecosystem with specific features and functionalities for JavaScript unit testing, making it a preferred choice for many JavaScript developers.
Key Difference 6: Learning Curve and Skill Set Using Jenkins effectively requires understanding the concepts of continuous integration, build automation, and deployment processes. It involves learning the Jenkins syntax, configuring jobs, and managing build environments. Jest, on the other hand, is relatively easy to learn and use, especially for JavaScript developers familiar with test-driven development (TDD) practices. It has a simple and intuitive API for writing tests and provides clear error messages and feedback, making it user-friendly for beginners.
In Summary, Jenkins is a versatile CI/CD tool with broader capabilities for build automation and deployment, while Jest is a JavaScript-specific testing framework primarily focused on unit testing. Jenkins offers more flexibility, integration options, and a larger community, while Jest provides a simpler setup, powerful features for JavaScript unit testing, and ease of use for JavaScript developers.
We are currently using Azure Pipelines for continous integration. Our applications are developed witn .NET framework. But when we look at the online Jenkins is the most widely used tool for continous integration. Can you please give me the advice which one is best to use for my case Azure pipeline or jenkins.
If your source code is on GitHub, also take a look at Github actions. https://github.com/features/actions
I'm open to anything. just want something that break less and doesn't need me to pay for it, and can be hosted on Docker. our scripting language is powershell core. so it's better to support it. also we are building dotnet core in our pipeline, so if they have anything related that helps with the CI would be nice.
Google cloud build can help you. It is hosted on cloud and also provide reasonable free quota.
I'm planning to setup complete CD-CD setup for spark and python application which we are going to deploy in aws lambda and EMR Cluster. Which tool would be best one to choose. Since my company is trying to adopt to concourse i would like to understand what are the lack of capabilities concourse have . Thanks in advance !
I would definetly recommend Concourse to you, as it is one of the most advanced modern methods of making CI/CD while Jenkins is an old monolithic dinosaur. Concourse itself is cloudnative and containerbased which helps you to build simple, high-performance and scalable CI/CD pipelines. In my opinion, the only lack of skills you have with Concourse is your own knowledge of how to build pipelines and automate things. Technincally there is no lack, i would even say you can extend it way more easily. But as a Con it is more easy to interact with Jenkins if you are only used to UIs. Concourse needs someone which is capable of using CLIs.
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?"
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.
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 !
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
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.
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.
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).
As we all know testing is an important part of any application. To assist with our testing we are going to use both Cypress and Jest. We feel these tools complement each other and will help us get good coverage of our code. We will use Cypress for our end to end testing as we've found it quite user friendly. Jest will be used for our unit tests because we've seen how many larger companies use it with great success.
Postman will be used to do integration testing with the backend API we create. It offers a clean interface to create many requests, and you can even organize these requests into collections. It helps to test the backend API first to make sure it's working before using it in the front-end. Jest can also be used for testing and is already embedded into React. Not only does it offer unit testing support in javascript, it can also do snapshot testing for the front-end to make sure components are rendering correctly. Enzyme is complementary to Jest and offers more functions such as shallow rendering. UnitTest will be used for Python testing as it is simple, has a lot of functionality and already built in with python. Sentry will be used for keeping track of errors as it is also easily integratable with Heroku because they offer it as an add-on. LogDNA will be used for tracking logs which are not errors and is also a Heroku add-on. Its good to have a separate service to record logs, monitor, track and even fix errors in real-time so our application can run more smoothly.
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.
Pros of Jenkins
- Hosted internally523
- Free open source469
- Great to build, deploy or launch anything async318
- Tons of integrations243
- Rich set of plugins with good documentation211
- Has support for build pipelines111
- Easy setup68
- It is open-source66
- Workflow plugin53
- Configuration as code13
- Very powerful tool12
- Many Plugins11
- Continuous Integration10
- Great flexibility10
- Git and Maven integration is better9
- 100% free and open source8
- Slack Integration (plugin)7
- Github integration7
- Self-hosted GitLab Integration (plugin)6
- Easy customisation6
- Pipeline API5
- Docker support5
- Fast builds4
- Hosted Externally4
- Excellent docker integration4
- Platform idnependency4
- AWS Integration3
- JOBDSL3
- It's Everywhere3
- Customizable3
- Can be run as a Docker container3
- It`w worked3
- Loose Coupling2
- NodeJS Support2
- Build PR Branch Only2
- Easily extendable with seamless integration2
- PHP Support2
- Ruby/Rails Support2
- Universal controller2
Pros of Jest
- Open source36
- Mock by default makes testing much simpler32
- Testing React Native Apps23
- Parallel test running20
- Fast16
- Bundled with JSDOM to enable DOM testing13
- Mock by default screws up your classes, breaking tests8
- Out of the box code coverage7
- Promise support7
- One stop shop for unit testing6
- Great documentation3
- Assert Library Included2
- Built in watch option with interactive filtering menu1
- Preset support1
- Can be used for BDD0
- Karma0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Jenkins
- Workarounds needed for basic requirements13
- Groovy with cumbersome syntax10
- Plugins compatibility issues8
- Lack of support7
- Limited abilities with declarative pipelines7
- No YAML syntax5
- Too tied to plugins versions4
Cons of Jest
- Documentation4
- Ambiguous configuration4
- Difficult3
- Many bugs still not fixed months/years after reporting2
- Multiple error messages for same error2
- Difficult to run single test/describe/file2
- Ambiguous2
- Bugged2
- BeforeAll timing out makes all passing tests fail1
- Slow1
- Reporter is too general1
- Unstable1
- Bad docs1
- Still does't support .mjs files natively1
- Can't fail beforeAll to abort tests1
- Interaction with watch mode on terminal0
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is Jenkins?
What is Jest?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with Jenkins?
What tools integrate with Jest?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+7
+4
+7
+4
+17
+32
+22
+42