Alternatives to GitLab logo

Alternatives to GitLab

GitHub, Bitbucket, Jenkins, Gogs, and Git are the most popular alternatives and competitors to GitLab.
61.5K
52.8K
+ 1
2.5K

What is GitLab and what are its top alternatives?

GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers.
GitLab is a tool in the Code Collaboration & Version Control category of a tech stack.

Top Alternatives to GitLab

  • GitHub
    GitHub

    GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together. ...

  • Bitbucket
    Bitbucket

    Bitbucket gives teams one place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private Git repositories. Teams choose Bitbucket because it has a superior Jira integration, built-in CI/CD, & is free for up to 5 users. ...

  • Jenkins
    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. ...

  • Gogs
    Gogs

    The goal of this project is to make the easiest, fastest and most painless way to set up a self-hosted Git service. With Go, this can be done in independent binary distribution across ALL platforms that Go supports, including Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows. ...

  • Git
    Git

    Git is a free and open source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency. ...

  • Azure DevOps
    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. ...

  • Bamboo
    Bamboo

    Focus on coding and count on Bamboo as your CI and build server! Create multi-stage build plans, set up triggers to start builds upon commits, and assign agents to your critical builds and deployments. ...

  • GitLab CI
    GitLab CI

    GitLab offers a continuous integration service. If you add a .gitlab-ci.yml file to the root directory of your repository, and configure your GitLab project to use a Runner, then each merge request or push triggers your CI pipeline. ...

GitLab alternatives & related posts

GitHub logo

GitHub

284.2K
248.2K
10.3K
Powerful collaboration, review, and code management for open source and private development projects
284.2K
248.2K
+ 1
10.3K
PROS OF GITHUB
  • 1.8K
    Open source friendly
  • 1.5K
    Easy source control
  • 1.3K
    Nice UI
  • 1.1K
    Great for team collaboration
  • 867
    Easy setup
  • 504
    Issue tracker
  • 486
    Great community
  • 483
    Remote team collaboration
  • 451
    Great way to share
  • 442
    Pull request and features planning
  • 147
    Just works
  • 132
    Integrated in many tools
  • 121
    Free Public Repos
  • 116
    Github Gists
  • 112
    Github pages
  • 83
    Easy to find repos
  • 62
    Open source
  • 60
    It's free
  • 60
    Easy to find projects
  • 56
    Network effect
  • 49
    Extensive API
  • 43
    Organizations
  • 42
    Branching
  • 34
    Developer Profiles
  • 32
    Git Powered Wikis
  • 30
    Great for collaboration
  • 24
    It's fun
  • 23
    Clean interface and good integrations
  • 22
    Community SDK involvement
  • 20
    Learn from others source code
  • 16
    Because: Git
  • 14
    It integrates directly with Azure
  • 10
    Standard in Open Source collab
  • 10
    Newsfeed
  • 8
    It integrates directly with Hipchat
  • 8
    Fast
  • 8
    Beautiful user experience
  • 7
    Easy to discover new code libraries
  • 6
    Smooth integration
  • 6
    Cloud SCM
  • 6
    Nice API
  • 6
    Graphs
  • 6
    Integrations
  • 6
    It's awesome
  • 5
    Quick Onboarding
  • 5
    Reliable
  • 5
    Remarkable uptime
  • 5
    CI Integration
  • 5
    Hands down best online Git service available
  • 4
    Uses GIT
  • 4
    Version Control
  • 4
    Simple but powerful
  • 4
    Unlimited Public Repos at no cost
  • 4
    Free HTML hosting
  • 4
    Security options
  • 4
    Loved by developers
  • 4
    Easy to use and collaborate with others
  • 3
    Ci
  • 3
    IAM
  • 3
    Nice to use
  • 3
    Easy deployment via SSH
  • 2
    Easy to use
  • 2
    Leads the copycats
  • 2
    All in one development service
  • 2
    Free private repos
  • 2
    Free HTML hostings
  • 2
    Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects
  • 2
    Beautiful
  • 2
    Easy source control and everything is backed up
  • 2
    IAM integration
  • 2
    Very Easy to Use
  • 2
    Good tools support
  • 2
    Issues tracker
  • 2
    Never dethroned
  • 2
    Self Hosted
  • 1
    Dasf
  • 1
    Profound
CONS OF GITHUB
  • 54
    Owned by micrcosoft
  • 38
    Expensive for lone developers that want private repos
  • 15
    Relatively slow product/feature release cadence
  • 10
    API scoping could be better
  • 9
    Only 3 collaborators for private repos
  • 4
    Limited featureset for issue management
  • 3
    Does not have a graph for showing history like git lens
  • 2
    GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions
  • 1
    No multilingual interface
  • 1
    Takes a long time to commit
  • 1
    Expensive

related GitHub posts

Johnny Bell

I was building a personal project that I needed to store items in a real time database. I am more comfortable with my Frontend skills than my backend so I didn't want to spend time building out anything in Ruby or Go.

I stumbled on Firebase by #Google, and it was really all I needed. It had realtime data, an area for storing file uploads and best of all for the amount of data I needed it was free!

I built out my application using tools I was familiar with, React for the framework, Redux.js to manage my state across components, and styled-components for the styling.

Now as this was a project I was just working on in my free time for fun I didn't really want to pay for hosting. I did some research and I found Netlify. I had actually seen them at #ReactRally the year before and deployed a Gatsby site to Netlify already.

Netlify was very easy to setup and link to my GitHub account you select a repo and pretty much with very little configuration you have a live site that will deploy every time you push to master.

With the selection of these tools I was able to build out my application, connect it to a realtime database, and deploy to a live environment all with $0 spent.

If you're looking to build out a small app I suggest giving these tools a go as you can get your idea out into the real world for absolutely no cost.

See more

Context: I wanted to create an end to end IoT data pipeline simulation in Google Cloud IoT Core and other GCP services. I never touched Terraform meaningfully until working on this project, and it's one of the best explorations in my development career. The documentation and syntax is incredibly human-readable and friendly. I'm used to building infrastructure through the google apis via Python , but I'm so glad past Sung did not make that decision. I was tempted to use Google Cloud Deployment Manager, but the templates were a bit convoluted by first impression. I'm glad past Sung did not make this decision either.

Solution: Leveraging Google Cloud Build Google Cloud Run Google Cloud Bigtable Google BigQuery Google Cloud Storage Google Compute Engine along with some other fun tools, I can deploy over 40 GCP resources using Terraform!

Check Out My Architecture: CLICK ME

Check out the GitHub repo attached

See more
Bitbucket logo

Bitbucket

40.3K
32.6K
2.8K
One place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private repositories
40.3K
32.6K
+ 1
2.8K
PROS OF BITBUCKET
  • 904
    Free private repos
  • 397
    Simple setup
  • 348
    Nice ui and tools
  • 341
    Unlimited private repositories
  • 240
    Affordable git hosting
  • 123
    Integrates with many apis and services
  • 119
    Reliable uptime
  • 87
    Nice gui
  • 85
    Pull requests and code reviews
  • 58
    Very customisable
  • 16
    Mercurial repositories
  • 14
    SourceTree integration
  • 12
    JIRA integration
  • 10
    Track every commit to an issue in JIRA
  • 8
    Deployment hooks
  • 8
    Best free alternative to Github
  • 7
    Automatically share repositories with all your teammates
  • 7
    Compatible with Mac and Windows
  • 6
    Source Code Insight
  • 6
    Price
  • 5
    Login with Google
  • 5
    Create a wiki
  • 5
    Approve pull request button
  • 4
    Customizable pipelines
  • 4
    #2 Atlassian Product after JIRA
  • 3
    Also supports Mercurial
  • 3
    Unlimited Private Repos at no cost
  • 3
    Continuous Integration and Delivery
  • 2
    Academic license program
  • 2
    Multilingual interface
  • 2
    Teamcity
  • 2
    Open source friendly
  • 2
    Issues tracker
  • 2
    IAM
  • 2
    IAM integration
  • 2
    Mercurial Support
CONS OF BITBUCKET
  • 19
    Not much community activity
  • 17
    Difficult to review prs because of confusing ui
  • 15
    Quite buggy
  • 10
    Managed by enterprise Java company
  • 8
    CI tool is not free of charge
  • 7
    Complexity with rights management
  • 6
    Only 5 collaborators for private repos
  • 4
    Slow performance
  • 2
    No AWS Codepipelines integration
  • 1
    No more Mercurial repositories
  • 1
    No server side git-hook support

related Bitbucket posts

Michael Kelly
Senior Software Engineer at StackShare · | 14 upvotes · 953.4K views

I use GitLab when building side-projects and MVPs. The interface and interactions are close enough to those of GitHub to prevent cognitive switching costs between professional and personal projects hosted on different services.

GitLab also provides a suite of tools including issue/project management, CI/CD with GitLab CI, and validation/landing pages with GitLab Pages. With everything in one place, on an #OpenSourceCloud GitLab makes it easy for me to manage much larger projects on my own, than would be possible with other solutions or tools.

It's petty I know, but I can also read the GitLab code diffs far more easily than diffs on GitHub or Bitbucket...they just look better in my opinion.

See more
Shared insights
on
GitHubGitHubGitLabGitLabBitbucketBitbucket

A bit difference in GitHub and GitLab though both are Version Control repository management services which provides key component in the software development workflow. A decision of choosing GitHub over GitLab is major leap extension from code management, to deployment and monitoring alongside looking beyond the code base hosting provided best fitted tools for developer communities.

  • Authentication stages - With GitLab you can set and modify people’s permissions according to their role. In GitHub, you can decide if someone gets a read or write access to a repository.
  • Built-In Continuous Integrations - GitLab offers its very own CI for free. No need to use an external CI service. And if you are already used to an external CI, you can obviously integrate with Jenkins, etc whereas GitHub offers various 3rd party integrations – such as Travis CI, CircleCI or Codeship – for running and testing your code. However, there’s no built-in CI solution at the moment.
  • Import/Export Resources - GitLab offers detailed documentation on how to import your data from other vendors – such as GitHub, Bitbucket to GitLab. GitHub, on the other hand, does not offer such detailed documentation for the most common git repositories. However, GitHub offers to use GitHub Importer if you have your source code in Subversion, Mercurial, TFS and others.

Also when it comes to exporting data, GitLab seems to do a pretty solid job, offering you the ability to export your projects including the following data:

  • Wiki and project repositories
  • Project uploads
  • The configuration including webhooks and services
  • Issues with comments, merge requests with diffs and comments, labels, milestones, snippets, and other project entities.

GitHub, on the other hand, seems to be more restrictive when it comes to export features of existing GitHub repositories. * Integrations - #githubmarketplace gives you an essence to have multiple and competitive integrations whereas you will find less in the GitLab.

So go ahead with better understanding.

See more
Jenkins logo

Jenkins

58.2K
49.7K
2.2K
An extendable open source continuous integration server
58.2K
49.7K
+ 1
2.2K
PROS OF JENKINS
  • 523
    Hosted internally
  • 469
    Free open source
  • 318
    Great to build, deploy or launch anything async
  • 243
    Tons of integrations
  • 211
    Rich set of plugins with good documentation
  • 111
    Has support for build pipelines
  • 68
    Easy setup
  • 66
    It is open-source
  • 53
    Workflow plugin
  • 13
    Configuration as code
  • 12
    Very powerful tool
  • 11
    Many Plugins
  • 10
    Continuous Integration
  • 10
    Great flexibility
  • 9
    Git and Maven integration is better
  • 8
    100% free and open source
  • 7
    Github integration
  • 7
    Slack Integration (plugin)
  • 6
    Easy customisation
  • 6
    Self-hosted GitLab Integration (plugin)
  • 5
    Docker support
  • 5
    Pipeline API
  • 4
    Fast builds
  • 4
    Platform idnependency
  • 4
    Hosted Externally
  • 4
    Excellent docker integration
  • 3
    It`w worked
  • 3
    Customizable
  • 3
    Can be run as a Docker container
  • 3
    It's Everywhere
  • 3
    JOBDSL
  • 3
    AWS Integration
  • 2
    Easily extendable with seamless integration
  • 2
    PHP Support
  • 2
    Build PR Branch Only
  • 2
    NodeJS Support
  • 2
    Ruby/Rails Support
  • 2
    Universal controller
  • 2
    Loose Coupling
CONS OF JENKINS
  • 13
    Workarounds needed for basic requirements
  • 10
    Groovy with cumbersome syntax
  • 8
    Plugins compatibility issues
  • 7
    Lack of support
  • 7
    Limited abilities with declarative pipelines
  • 5
    No YAML syntax
  • 4
    Too tied to plugins versions

related Jenkins posts

Tymoteusz Paul
Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 9.6M views

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
Thierry Schellenbach

Releasing new versions of our services is done by Travis CI. Travis first runs our test suite. Once it passes, it publishes a new release binary to GitHub.

Common tasks such as installing dependencies for the Go project, or building a binary are automated using plain old Makefiles. (We know, crazy old school, right?) Our binaries are compressed using UPX.

Travis has come a long way over the past years. I used to prefer Jenkins in some cases since it was easier to debug broken builds. With the addition of the aptly named “debug build” button, Travis is now the clear winner. It’s easy to use and free for open source, with no need to maintain anything.

#ContinuousIntegration #CodeCollaborationVersionControl

See more
Gogs logo

Gogs

175
305
182
A self-hosted Git service written in Go
175
305
+ 1
182
PROS OF GOGS
  • 36
    Self-hosted github like service
  • 31
    Very low memory footprint
  • 29
    Easy to install / update
  • 17
    Lightweight (low minimal req.) runs on Raspberry pi
  • 16
    Single binary deploy no dependencies
  • 14
    Open source
  • 12
    Cross platform (MacOS, Windows, Linux ...)
  • 11
    Wiki
  • 10
    Issue tracker
  • 3
    Great UI
  • 3
    LDAP Support
CONS OF GOGS
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Gogs posts

    Russtopia Labs
    Sr. Doodad Imagineer at Russtopia Labs · | 5 upvotes · 417.5K views
    Shared insights
    on
    GogsGogsGitHubGitHubGolangGolangGitLabGitLab

    I installed Gogs after a few repos I planned to use on GitHub disappeared without explanation, and after Microsoft's acquisition of same, it made me think about the over-centralization of community-developed software. A self-hosted solution that enables easy point-and-click mirroring of important repositories for my projects, both in-house and 3rd-party, ensures I won't be bitten by upstream catastrophes. (So far, Microsoft's stewardship has been fine, but always be prepared). It's also a very nice way to host one's own private repos before they're ready for prime-time on github.

    Gogs is written in Go and is easy to install and configure, IMHO much more so than GitLab, though it's of course less feature-rich; the only major feature I wish Gogs had is an integrated code review tool, but the web plugin hypothes.is https://stackshare.io/hypothes-is/hypothes-is is quite suitable as a code review tool. Set up a group for each code review, and just highlight lines to add comments in pull request pages of Gogs.

    See more
    Git logo

    Git

    296.2K
    177.6K
    6.6K
    Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
    296.2K
    177.6K
    + 1
    6.6K
    PROS OF GIT
    • 1.4K
      Distributed version control system
    • 1.1K
      Efficient branching and merging
    • 959
      Fast
    • 845
      Open source
    • 726
      Better than svn
    • 368
      Great command-line application
    • 306
      Simple
    • 291
      Free
    • 232
      Easy to use
    • 222
      Does not require server
    • 27
      Distributed
    • 22
      Small & Fast
    • 18
      Feature based workflow
    • 15
      Staging Area
    • 13
      Most wide-spread VSC
    • 11
      Role-based codelines
    • 11
      Disposable Experimentation
    • 7
      Frictionless Context Switching
    • 6
      Data Assurance
    • 5
      Efficient
    • 4
      Just awesome
    • 3
      Github integration
    • 3
      Easy branching and merging
    • 2
      Compatible
    • 2
      Flexible
    • 2
      Possible to lose history and commits
    • 1
      Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing
    • 1
      Light
    • 1
      Team Integration
    • 1
      Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
    • 1
      Easy
    • 1
      Flexible, easy, Safe, and fast
    • 1
      CLI is great, but the GUI tools are awesome
    • 1
      It's what you do
    • 0
      Phinx
    CONS OF GIT
    • 16
      Hard to learn
    • 11
      Inconsistent command line interface
    • 9
      Easy to lose uncommitted work
    • 7
      Worst documentation ever possibly made
    • 5
      Awful merge handling
    • 3
      Unexistent preventive security flows
    • 3
      Rebase hell
    • 2
      When --force is disabled, cannot rebase
    • 2
      Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly
    • 1
      Doesn't scale for big data

    related Git posts

    Simon Reymann
    Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 10.7M views

    Our whole DevOps stack consists of the following tools:

    • GitHub (incl. GitHub Pages/Markdown for Documentation, GettingStarted and HowTo's) for collaborative review and code management tool
    • Respectively Git as revision control system
    • SourceTree as Git GUI
    • Visual Studio Code as IDE
    • CircleCI for continuous integration (automatize development process)
    • Prettier / TSLint / ESLint as code linter
    • SonarQube as quality gate
    • Docker as container management (incl. Docker Compose for multi-container application management)
    • VirtualBox for operating system simulation tests
    • Kubernetes as cluster management for docker containers
    • Heroku for deploying in test environments
    • nginx as web server (preferably used as facade server in production environment)
    • SSLMate (using OpenSSL) for certificate management
    • Amazon EC2 (incl. Amazon S3) for deploying in stage (production-like) and production environments
    • PostgreSQL as preferred database system
    • Redis as preferred in-memory database/store (great for caching)

    The main reason we have chosen Kubernetes over Docker Swarm is related to the following artifacts:

    • Key features: Easy and flexible installation, Clear dashboard, Great scaling operations, Monitoring is an integral part, Great load balancing concepts, Monitors the condition and ensures compensation in the event of failure.
    • Applications: An application can be deployed using a combination of pods, deployments, and services (or micro-services).
    • Functionality: Kubernetes as a complex installation and setup process, but it not as limited as Docker Swarm.
    • Monitoring: It supports multiple versions of logging and monitoring when the services are deployed within the cluster (Elasticsearch/Kibana (ELK), Heapster/Grafana, Sysdig cloud integration).
    • Scalability: All-in-one framework for distributed systems.
    • Other Benefits: Kubernetes is backed by the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), huge community among container orchestration tools, it is an open source and modular tool that works with any OS.
    See more
    Tymoteusz Paul
    Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 9.6M views

    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
    Azure DevOps logo

    Azure DevOps

    2.7K
    2.8K
    249
    Services for teams to share code, track work, and ship software
    2.7K
    2.8K
    + 1
    249
    PROS OF AZURE DEVOPS
    • 56
      Complete and powerful
    • 32
      Huge extension ecosystem
    • 27
      Azure integration
    • 26
      Flexible and powerful
    • 26
      One Stop Shop For Build server, Project Mgt, CDCI
    • 15
      Everything I need. Simple and intuitive UI
    • 13
      Support Open Source
    • 8
      Integrations
    • 7
      GitHub Integration
    • 6
      Cost free for Stakeholders
    • 6
      One 4 all
    • 6
      Crap
    • 6
      Project Mgmt Features
    • 5
      Runs in the cloud
    • 3
      Agent On-Premise(Linux - Windows)
    • 2
      Aws integration
    • 2
      Link Test Cases to Stories
    • 2
      Jenkins Integration
    • 1
      GCP Integration
    CONS OF AZURE DEVOPS
    • 8
      Still dependant on C# for agents
    • 5
      Half Baked
    • 5
      Many in devops disregard MS altogether
    • 4
      Not a requirements management tool
    • 4
      Jack of all trades, master of none
    • 4
      Capacity across cross functional teams not visibile
    • 3
      Poor Jenkins integration
    • 2
      Tedious for test plan/case creation
    • 1
      Switching accounts is impossible

    related Azure DevOps posts

    Farzad Jalali
    Senior Software Architect at BerryWorld · | 8 upvotes · 426.3K views

    Visual Studio Azure DevOps Azure Functions Azure Websites #Azure #AzureKeyVault #AzureAD #AzureApps

    #Azure Cloud Since Amazon is potentially our competitor then we need a different cloud vendor, also our programmers are microsoft oriented so the choose were obviously #Azure for us.

    Azure DevOps Because we need to be able to develop a neww pipeline into Azure environment ina few minutes.

    Azure Kubernetes Service We already in #Azure , also need to use K8s , so let's use AKS as it's a manged Kubernetes in the #Azure

    See more
    Andrey Kurdyumov
    Shared insights
    on
    Azure DevOpsAzure DevOpsGitGit

    I use Azure DevOps because for me it gradually walk me from private Git repositories to simplest free option for CI/CD pipelines at the time. I spend 0$ initially to manager CI/CD for my small private projects. No need to go into two different places to setup integration, once I have git repository, I could deploy projects. Right now this is not the case since CI/CD is default for me, so I use it now from memories of old good days. I'm not yet need complexity on the projects, so I don't even consider other options with "more choices". I carefully limit my set of options during development, that's why Azure DevOps (VSTS)

    See more
    Bamboo logo

    Bamboo

    509
    549
    17
    Tie automated builds, tests, and releases together in a single workflow
    509
    549
    + 1
    17
    PROS OF BAMBOO
    • 10
      Integrates with other Atlassian tools
    • 4
      Great notification scheme
    • 2
      Great UI
    • 1
      Has Deployment Projects
    CONS OF BAMBOO
    • 6
      Expensive
    • 1
      Low community support
    • 1
      Bad UI
    • 1
      Bad integration with docker

    related Bamboo posts

    We were using a hosted version of Redmine to track defects and user stories originally. We migrated to Jira.

    Jira was an easy decision for a number of reasons:

    • It's much more "Scrum ready" straight out of the box
    • It's so much easier to keep a track of progress (I love the reporting)
    • It natively encourages you to adhere to Scrum/Agile/Kanban practices
    • Atlassian has a fantastic DevOps ecosystem when considering the likes of Confluence and Bamboo etc
    • So many integrations!
    • Its UI is so intuitive which makes it an absolute pleasure to use!

    I know there are alot of other tools in this space but not even considering anything else at the moment. Love Jira!

    See more
    xie zhifeng
    Shared insights
    on
    BambooBambooJenkinsJenkinsGitLabGitLab
    at

    I am choosing a DevOps toolset for my team. GitLab is open source and quite cloud-native. Jenkins has a very popular environment system but old-style technicals. Bamboo is very nice but integrated only with Atlassian products.

    See more
    GitLab CI logo

    GitLab CI

    2.3K
    1.6K
    75
    GitLab integrated CI to test, build and deploy your code
    2.3K
    1.6K
    + 1
    75
    PROS OF GITLAB CI
    • 22
      Robust CI with awesome Docker support
    • 13
      Simple configuration
    • 9
      All in one solution
    • 7
      Source Control and CI in one place
    • 5
      Integrated with VCS on commit
    • 5
      Free and open source
    • 5
      Easy to configure own build server i.e. GitLab-Runner
    • 2
      Hosted internally
    • 1
      Built-in Docker Registry
    • 1
      Built-in support of Review Apps
    • 1
      Pipeline could be started manually
    • 1
      Enable or disable pipeline by using env variables
    • 1
      Gitlab templates could be shared across logical group
    • 1
      Easy to setup the dedicated runner to particular job
    • 1
      Built-in support of Kubernetes
    CONS OF GITLAB CI
    • 2
      Works best with GitLab repositories

    related GitLab CI posts

    I have got a small radio service running on Node.js. Front end is written with React and packed with Webpack . I use Docker for my #DeploymentWorkflow along with Docker Swarm and GitLab CI on a single Google Compute Engine instance, which is also a runner itself. Pretty unscalable decision but it works great for tiny projects. The project is available on https://fridgefm.com

    See more
    Joshua Dean Küpper
    CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 20 upvotes · 711.5K views

    We use GitLab CI because of the great native integration as a part of the GitLab framework and the linting-capabilities it offers. The visualization of complex pipelines and the embedding within the project overview made Gitlab CI even more convenient. We use it for all projects, all deployments and as a part of GitLab Pages.

    While we initially used the Shell-executor, we quickly switched to the Docker-executor and use it exclusively now.

    We formerly used Jenkins but preferred to handle everything within GitLab . Aside from the unification of our infrastructure another motivation was the "configuration-in-file"-approach, that Gitlab CI offered, while Jenkins support of this concept was very limited and users had to resort to using the webinterface. Since the file is included within the repository, it is also version controlled, which was a huge plus for us.

    See more