Alternatives to Juju logo

Alternatives to Juju

Terraform, OpenStack, Ansible, Kubernetes, and Git are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Juju.
27
54
+ 1
0

What is Juju and what are its top alternatives?

It is an open source, application and service modelling tool from Ubuntu that helps you deploy, manage and scale your applications on any cloud.
Juju is a tool in the Server Configuration and Automation category of a tech stack.
Juju is an open source tool with GitHub stars and GitHub forks. Here’s a link to Juju's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to Juju

  • Terraform
    Terraform

    With Terraform, you describe your complete infrastructure as code, even as it spans multiple service providers. Your servers may come from AWS, your DNS may come from CloudFlare, and your database may come from Heroku. Terraform will build all these resources across all these providers in parallel. ...

  • OpenStack
    OpenStack

    OpenStack is a cloud operating system that controls large pools of compute, storage, and networking resources throughout a datacenter, all managed through a dashboard that gives administrators control while empowering their users to provision resources through a web interface. ...

  • Ansible
    Ansible

    Ansible is an IT automation tool. It can configure systems, deploy software, and orchestrate more advanced IT tasks such as continuous deployments or zero downtime rolling updates. Ansible’s goals are foremost those of simplicity and maximum ease of use. ...

  • Kubernetes
    Kubernetes

    Kubernetes is an open source orchestration system for Docker containers. It handles scheduling onto nodes in a compute cluster and actively manages workloads to ensure that their state matches the users declared intentions. ...

  • 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. ...

  • 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. ...

  • Visual Studio Code
    Visual Studio Code

    Build and debug modern web and cloud applications. Code is free and available on your favorite platform - Linux, Mac OSX, and Windows. ...

  • Docker
    Docker

    The Docker Platform is the industry-leading container platform for continuous, high-velocity innovation, enabling organizations to seamlessly build and share any application — from legacy to what comes next — and securely run them anywhere ...

Juju alternatives & related posts

Terraform logo

Terraform

18.5K
344
Describe your complete infrastructure as code and build resources across providers
18.5K
344
PROS OF TERRAFORM
  • 121
    Infrastructure as code
  • 73
    Declarative syntax
  • 45
    Planning
  • 28
    Simple
  • 24
    Parallelism
  • 8
    Well-documented
  • 8
    Cloud agnostic
  • 6
    It's like coding your infrastructure in simple English
  • 6
    Immutable infrastructure
  • 5
    Platform agnostic
  • 4
    Extendable
  • 4
    Automation
  • 4
    Automates infrastructure deployments
  • 4
    Portability
  • 2
    Lightweight
  • 2
    Scales to hundreds of hosts
CONS OF TERRAFORM
  • 1
    Doesn't have full support to GKE

related Terraform posts

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
Emanuel Evans
Senior Architect at Rainforest QA · | 20 upvotes · 1.6M views

We recently moved our main applications from Heroku to Kubernetes . The 3 main driving factors behind the switch were scalability (database size limits), security (the inability to set up PostgreSQL instances in private networks), and costs (GCP is cheaper for raw computing resources).

We prefer using managed services, so we are using Google Kubernetes Engine with Google Cloud SQL for PostgreSQL for our PostgreSQL databases and Google Cloud Memorystore for Redis . For our CI/CD pipeline, we are using CircleCI and Google Cloud Build to deploy applications managed with Helm . The new infrastructure is managed with Terraform .

Read the blog post to go more in depth.

See more
OpenStack logo

OpenStack

788
138
Open source software for building private and public clouds
788
138
PROS OF OPENSTACK
  • 60
    Private cloud
  • 39
    Avoid vendor lock-in
  • 23
    Flexible in use
  • 7
    Industry leader
  • 5
    Robust architecture
  • 4
    Supported by many companies in top500
CONS OF OPENSTACK
    Be the first to leave a con

    related OpenStack posts

    Ansible logo

    Ansible

    19.1K
    1.3K
    Radically simple configuration-management, application deployment, task-execution, and multi-node orchestration engine
    19.1K
    1.3K
    PROS OF ANSIBLE
    • 284
      Agentless
    • 210
      Great configuration
    • 199
      Simple
    • 176
      Powerful
    • 155
      Easy to learn
    • 69
      Flexible
    • 55
      Doesn't get in the way of getting s--- done
    • 35
      Makes sense
    • 30
      Super efficient and flexible
    • 27
      Powerful
    • 11
      Dynamic Inventory
    • 9
      Backed by Red Hat
    • 7
      Works with AWS
    • 6
      Cloud Oriented
    • 6
      Easy to maintain
    • 4
      Vagrant provisioner
    • 4
      Simple and powerful
    • 4
      Multi language
    • 4
      Simple
    • 4
      Because SSH
    • 4
      Procedural or declarative, or both
    • 4
      Easy
    • 3
      Consistency
    • 2
      Well-documented
    • 2
      Masterless
    • 2
      Debugging is simple
    • 2
      Merge hash to get final configuration similar to hiera
    • 2
      Fast as hell
    • 1
      Manage any OS
    • 1
      Work on windows, but difficult to manage
    • 1
      Certified Content
    CONS OF ANSIBLE
    • 8
      Dangerous
    • 5
      Hard to install
    • 3
      Doesn't Run on Windows
    • 3
      Bloated
    • 3
      Backward compatibility
    • 2
      No immutable infrastructure

    related Ansible posts

    Tymoteusz Paul
    Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 10.1M 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
    Sebastian Gębski

    Heroku was a decent choice to start a business, but at some point our platform was too big, too complex & too heterogenic, so Heroku started to be a constraint, not a benefit. First, we've started containerizing our apps with Docker to eliminate "works in my machine" syndrome & uniformize the environment setup. The first orchestration was composed with Docker Compose , but at some point it made sense to move it to Kubernetes. Fortunately, we've made a very good technical decision when starting our work with containers - all the container configuration & provisions HAD (since the beginning) to be done in code (Infrastructure as Code) - we've used Terraform & Ansible for that (correspondingly). This general trend of containerisation was accompanied by another, parallel & equally big project: migrating environments from Heroku to AWS: using Amazon EC2 , Amazon EKS, Amazon S3 & Amazon RDS.

    See more
    Kubernetes logo

    Kubernetes

    60.1K
    681
    Manage a cluster of Linux containers as a single system to accelerate Dev and simplify Ops
    60.1K
    681
    PROS OF KUBERNETES
    • 166
      Leading docker container management solution
    • 129
      Simple and powerful
    • 107
      Open source
    • 76
      Backed by google
    • 58
      The right abstractions
    • 25
      Scale services
    • 20
      Replication controller
    • 11
      Permission managment
    • 9
      Supports autoscaling
    • 8
      Simple
    • 8
      Cheap
    • 6
      Self-healing
    • 5
      Open, powerful, stable
    • 5
      Reliable
    • 5
      No cloud platform lock-in
    • 5
      Promotes modern/good infrascture practice
    • 4
      Scalable
    • 4
      Quick cloud setup
    • 3
      Custom and extensibility
    • 3
      Captain of Container Ship
    • 3
      Cloud Agnostic
    • 3
      Backed by Red Hat
    • 3
      Runs on azure
    • 3
      A self healing environment with rich metadata
    • 2
      Everything of CaaS
    • 2
      Gke
    • 2
      Golang
    • 2
      Easy setup
    • 2
      Expandable
    • 2
      Sfg
    CONS OF KUBERNETES
    • 16
      Steep learning curve
    • 15
      Poor workflow for development
    • 8
      Orchestrates only infrastructure
    • 4
      High resource requirements for on-prem clusters
    • 2
      Too heavy for simple systems
    • 1
      Additional vendor lock-in (Docker)
    • 1
      More moving parts to secure
    • 1
      Additional Technology Overhead

    related Kubernetes posts

    Conor Myhrvold
    Tech Brand Mgr, Office of CTO at Uber · | 44 upvotes · 13M views

    How Uber developed the open source, end-to-end distributed tracing Jaeger , now a CNCF project:

    Distributed tracing is quickly becoming a must-have component in the tools that organizations use to monitor their complex, microservice-based architectures. At Uber, our open source distributed tracing system Jaeger saw large-scale internal adoption throughout 2016, integrated into hundreds of microservices and now recording thousands of traces every second.

    Here is the story of how we got here, from investigating off-the-shelf solutions like Zipkin, to why we switched from pull to push architecture, and how distributed tracing will continue to evolve:

    https://eng.uber.com/distributed-tracing/

    (GitHub Pages : https://www.jaegertracing.io/, GitHub: https://github.com/jaegertracing/jaeger)

    Bindings/Operator: Python Java Node.js Go C++ Kubernetes JavaScript OpenShift C# Apache Spark

    See more
    Yshay Yaacobi

    Our first experience with .NET core was when we developed our OSS feature management platform - Tweek (https://github.com/soluto/tweek). We wanted to create a solution that is able to run anywhere (super important for OSS), has excellent performance characteristics and can fit in a multi-container architecture. We decided to implement our rule engine processor in F# , our main service was implemented in C# and other components were built using JavaScript / TypeScript and Go.

    Visual Studio Code worked really well for us as well, it worked well with all our polyglot services and the .Net core integration had great cross-platform developer experience (to be fair, F# was a bit trickier) - actually, each of our team members used a different OS (Ubuntu, macos, windows). Our production deployment ran for a time on Docker Swarm until we've decided to adopt Kubernetes with almost seamless migration process.

    After our positive experience of running .Net core workloads in containers and developing Tweek's .Net services on non-windows machines, C# had gained back some of its popularity (originally lost to Node.js), and other teams have been using it for developing microservices, k8s sidecars (like https://github.com/Soluto/airbag), cli tools, serverless functions and other projects...

    See more
    Git logo

    Git

    298.5K
    6.6K
    Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
    298.5K
    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
    • 28
      Distributed
    • 23
      Small & Fast
    • 18
      Feature based workflow
    • 15
      Staging Area
    • 13
      Most wide-spread VSC
    • 11
      Disposable Experimentation
    • 11
      Role-based codelines
    • 7
      Frictionless Context Switching
    • 6
      Data Assurance
    • 5
      Efficient
    • 4
      Just awesome
    • 3
      Easy branching and merging
    • 3
      Github integration
    • 2
      Compatible
    • 2
      Possible to lose history and commits
    • 2
      Flexible
    • 1
      Team Integration
    • 1
      Easy
    • 1
      Light
    • 1
      Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
    • 1
      Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing
    • 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
    • 8
      Worst documentation ever possibly made
    • 5
      Awful merge handling
    • 3
      Unexistent preventive security flows
    • 3
      Rebase hell
    • 2
      Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly
    • 2
      When --force is disabled, cannot rebase
    • 1
      Doesn't scale for big data

    related Git posts

    Simon Reymann
    Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 11.8M 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 · 10.1M 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
    GitHub logo

    GitHub

    287.3K
    10.3K
    Powerful collaboration, review, and code management for open source and private development projects
    287.3K
    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
    • 868
      Easy setup
    • 504
      Issue tracker
    • 487
      Great community
    • 483
      Remote team collaboration
    • 449
      Great way to share
    • 442
      Pull request and features planning
    • 147
      Just works
    • 132
      Integrated in many tools
    • 122
      Free Public Repos
    • 116
      Github Gists
    • 113
      Github pages
    • 83
      Easy to find repos
    • 62
      Open source
    • 60
      Easy to find projects
    • 60
      It's free
    • 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
      Fast
    • 8
      Beautiful user experience
    • 8
      It integrates directly with Hipchat
    • 7
      Easy to discover new code libraries
    • 6
      It's awesome
    • 6
      Smooth integration
    • 6
      Cloud SCM
    • 6
      Nice API
    • 6
      Graphs
    • 6
      Integrations
    • 5
      Hands down best online Git service available
    • 5
      Reliable
    • 5
      Quick Onboarding
    • 5
      CI Integration
    • 5
      Remarkable uptime
    • 4
      Security options
    • 4
      Loved by developers
    • 4
      Uses GIT
    • 4
      Free HTML hosting
    • 4
      Easy to use and collaborate with others
    • 4
      Version Control
    • 4
      Simple but powerful
    • 4
      Unlimited Public Repos at no cost
    • 3
      Nice to use
    • 3
      IAM
    • 3
      Ci
    • 3
      Easy deployment via SSH
    • 2
      Free private repos
    • 2
      Good tools support
    • 2
      All in one development service
    • 2
      Never dethroned
    • 2
      Easy source control and everything is backed up
    • 2
      Issues tracker
    • 2
      Self Hosted
    • 2
      IAM integration
    • 2
      Very Easy to Use
    • 2
      Easy to use
    • 2
      Leads the copycats
    • 2
      Free HTML hostings
    • 2
      Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects
    • 2
      Beautiful
    • 1
      Dasf
    • 1
      Profound
    CONS OF GITHUB
    • 55
      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
    Visual Studio Code logo

    Visual Studio Code

    180.5K
    2.3K
    Build and debug modern web and cloud applications, by Microsoft
    180.5K
    2.3K
    PROS OF VISUAL STUDIO CODE
    • 340
      Powerful multilanguage IDE
    • 308
      Fast
    • 193
      Front-end develop out of the box
    • 158
      Support TypeScript IntelliSense
    • 142
      Very basic but free
    • 126
      Git integration
    • 106
      Intellisense
    • 78
      Faster than Atom
    • 53
      Better ui, easy plugins, and nice git integration
    • 45
      Great Refactoring Tools
    • 44
      Good Plugins
    • 42
      Terminal
    • 38
      Superb markdown support
    • 36
      Open Source
    • 35
      Extensions
    • 26
      Awesome UI
    • 26
      Large & up-to-date extension community
    • 24
      Powerful and fast
    • 22
      Portable
    • 18
      Best code editor
    • 18
      Best editor
    • 17
      Easy to get started with
    • 15
      Lots of extensions
    • 15
      Good for begginers
    • 15
      Crossplatform
    • 15
      Built on Electron
    • 14
      Extensions for everything
    • 14
      Open, cross-platform, fast, monthly updates
    • 14
      All Languages Support
    • 13
      Easy to use and learn
    • 12
      "fast, stable & easy to use"
    • 12
      Extensible
    • 11
      Ui design is great
    • 11
      Totally customizable
    • 11
      Git out of the box
    • 11
      Useful for begginer
    • 11
      Faster edit for slow computer
    • 10
      SSH support
    • 10
      Great community
    • 10
      Fast Startup
    • 9
      Works With Almost EveryThing You Need
    • 9
      Great language support
    • 9
      Powerful Debugger
    • 9
      It has terminal and there are lots of shortcuts in it
    • 8
      Can compile and run .py files
    • 8
      Python extension is fast
    • 7
      Features rich
    • 7
      Great document formater
    • 6
      He is not Michael
    • 6
      Extension Echosystem
    • 6
      She is not Rachel
    • 6
      Awesome multi cursor support
    • 5
      VSCode.pro Course makes it easy to learn
    • 5
      Language server client
    • 5
      SFTP Workspace
    • 5
      Very proffesional
    • 5
      Easy azure
    • 4
      Has better support and more extentions for debugging
    • 4
      Supports lots of operating systems
    • 4
      Excellent as git difftool and mergetool
    • 4
      Virtualenv integration
    • 3
      Better autocompletes than Atom
    • 3
      Has more than enough languages for any developer
    • 3
      'batteries included'
    • 3
      More tools to integrate with vs
    • 3
      Emmet preinstalled
    • 2
      VS Code Server: Browser version of VS Code
    • 2
      CMake support with autocomplete
    • 2
      Microsoft
    • 2
      Customizable
    • 2
      Light
    • 2
      Big extension marketplace
    • 2
      Fast and ruby is built right in
    • 1
      File:///C:/Users/ydemi/Downloads/yuksel_demirkaya_webpa
    CONS OF VISUAL STUDIO CODE
    • 46
      Slow startup
    • 29
      Resource hog at times
    • 20
      Poor refactoring
    • 13
      Poor UI Designer
    • 11
      Weak Ui design tools
    • 10
      Poor autocomplete
    • 8
      Super Slow
    • 8
      Huge cpu usage with few installed extension
    • 8
      Microsoft sends telemetry data
    • 7
      Poor in PHP
    • 6
      It's MicroSoft
    • 3
      Poor in Python
    • 3
      No Built in Browser Preview
    • 3
      No color Intergrator
    • 3
      Very basic for java development and buggy at times
    • 3
      No built in live Preview
    • 3
      Electron
    • 2
      Bad Plugin Architecture
    • 2
      Powered by Electron
    • 1
      Terminal does not identify path vars sometimes
    • 1
      Slow C++ Language Server

    related Visual Studio Code posts

    Yshay Yaacobi

    Our first experience with .NET core was when we developed our OSS feature management platform - Tweek (https://github.com/soluto/tweek). We wanted to create a solution that is able to run anywhere (super important for OSS), has excellent performance characteristics and can fit in a multi-container architecture. We decided to implement our rule engine processor in F# , our main service was implemented in C# and other components were built using JavaScript / TypeScript and Go.

    Visual Studio Code worked really well for us as well, it worked well with all our polyglot services and the .Net core integration had great cross-platform developer experience (to be fair, F# was a bit trickier) - actually, each of our team members used a different OS (Ubuntu, macos, windows). Our production deployment ran for a time on Docker Swarm until we've decided to adopt Kubernetes with almost seamless migration process.

    After our positive experience of running .Net core workloads in containers and developing Tweek's .Net services on non-windows machines, C# had gained back some of its popularity (originally lost to Node.js), and other teams have been using it for developing microservices, k8s sidecars (like https://github.com/Soluto/airbag), cli tools, serverless functions and other projects...

    See more
    Simon Reymann
    Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 11.8M 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
    Docker logo

    Docker

    175.3K
    3.9K
    Enterprise Container Platform for High-Velocity Innovation.
    175.3K
    3.9K
    PROS OF DOCKER
    • 823
      Rapid integration and build up
    • 692
      Isolation
    • 521
      Open source
    • 505
      Testa­bil­i­ty and re­pro­ducibil­i­ty
    • 460
      Lightweight
    • 218
      Standardization
    • 185
      Scalable
    • 106
      Upgrading / down­grad­ing / ap­pli­ca­tion versions
    • 88
      Security
    • 85
      Private paas environments
    • 34
      Portability
    • 26
      Limit resource usage
    • 17
      Game changer
    • 16
      I love the way docker has changed virtualization
    • 14
      Fast
    • 12
      Concurrency
    • 8
      Docker's Compose tools
    • 6
      Easy setup
    • 6
      Fast and Portable
    • 5
      Because its fun
    • 4
      Makes shipping to production very simple
    • 3
      Highly useful
    • 3
      It's dope
    • 2
      Package the environment with the application
    • 2
      Super
    • 2
      Open source and highly configurable
    • 2
      Simplicity, isolation, resource effective
    • 2
      MacOS support FAKE
    • 2
      Its cool
    • 2
      Does a nice job hogging memory
    • 2
      Docker hub for the FTW
    • 2
      HIgh Throughput
    • 2
      Very easy to setup integrate and build
    • 0
      Asdfd
    CONS OF DOCKER
    • 8
      New versions == broken features
    • 6
      Unreliable networking
    • 6
      Documentation not always in sync
    • 4
      Moves quickly
    • 3
      Not Secure

    related Docker posts

    Simon Reymann
    Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 11.8M 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 · 10.1M 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