Alternatives to QUnit logo

Alternatives to QUnit

Mocha, Jest, Jasmine, JUnit, and Selenium are the most popular alternatives and competitors to QUnit.
594
83
+ 1
17

What is QUnit and what are its top alternatives?

QUnit is a powerful, easy-to-use JavaScript unit testing framework. It's used by the jQuery, jQuery UI and jQuery Mobile projects and is capable of testing any generic JavaScript code, including itself!
QUnit is a tool in the Javascript Testing Framework category of a tech stack.
QUnit is an open source tool with GitHub stars and GitHub forks. Here’s a link to QUnit's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to QUnit

  • Mocha
    Mocha

    Mocha is a feature-rich JavaScript test framework running on node.js and the browser, making asynchronous testing simple and fun. Mocha tests run serially, allowing for flexible and accurate reporting, while mapping uncaught exceptions to the correct test cases. ...

  • Jest
    Jest

    Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.

  • Jasmine
    Jasmine

    Jasmine is a Behavior Driven Development testing framework for JavaScript. It does not rely on browsers, DOM, or any JavaScript framework. Thus it's suited for websites, Node.js projects, or anywhere that JavaScript can run. ...

  • JUnit
    JUnit

    JUnit is a simple framework to write repeatable tests. It is an instance of the xUnit architecture for unit testing frameworks. ...

  • Selenium
    Selenium

    Selenium automates browsers. That's it! What you do with that power is entirely up to you. Primarily, it is for automating web applications for testing purposes, but is certainly not limited to just that. Boring web-based administration tasks can (and should!) also be automated as well. ...

  • Chai
    Chai

    It is a BDD / TDD assertion library for node and the browser that can be delightfully paired with any javascript testing framework. It has several interfaces that allow the developer to choose the most comfortable. The chain-capable BDD styles provide an expressive language & readable style, while the TDD assert style provides a more classical feel. ...

  • JavaScript
    JavaScript

    JavaScript is most known as the scripting language for Web pages, but used in many non-browser environments as well such as node.js or Apache CouchDB. It is a prototype-based, multi-paradigm scripting language that is dynamic,and supports object-oriented, imperative, and functional programming styles. ...

  • 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. ...

QUnit alternatives & related posts

Mocha logo

Mocha

8.6K
2.9K
430
Simple, flexible, fun javascript test framework for node.js & the browser
8.6K
2.9K
+ 1
430
PROS OF MOCHA
  • 137
    Open source
  • 102
    Simple
  • 81
    Promise support
  • 48
    Flexible
  • 29
    Easy to add support for Generators
  • 12
    For browser and server testing
  • 7
    Curstom assertion libraries
  • 5
    Works with Karma
  • 3
    No other better tools
  • 1
    Simple setup
  • 1
    Works with saucelabs
  • 1
    Lots of tutorials and help online
  • 1
    Default reporter is nice, clean, and itemized
  • 1
    Works with BrowserStack
  • 1
    Simple integration testing
CONS OF MOCHA
  • 3
    Cannot test a promisified functions without assertion
  • 2
    No assertion count in results
  • 1
    Not as many reporter options as Jest

related Mocha posts

Anurag Maurya

Needs advice on code coverage tool in Node.js/ExpressJS with External API Testing Framework

Hello community,

I have a web application with the backend developed using Node.js and Express.js. The backend server is in one directory, and I have a separate API testing framework, made using SuperTest, Mocha, and Chai, in another directory. The testing framework pings the API, retrieves responses, and performs validations.

I'm currently looking for a code coverage tool that can accurately measure the code coverage of my backend code when triggered by the API testing framework. I've tried using Istanbul and NYC with instrumented code, but the results are not as expected.

Could you please recommend a reliable code coverage tool or suggest an approach to effectively measure the code coverage of my Node.js/Express.js backend code in this setup?

See more

I use both mocha and Jest because:

  • I don't care whether teams use Jest or Mocha. But jest is way too overhyped. Most devs are writing integration tests and think that it's so much better but frankly I don't write integration tests as the way to get both design feedback and confidence when I code. I adhere to the test pyramid, not ice cream cone or the dumb "trophy"

  • I TDD, so I only ever use the "API" of test frameworks. I don't do a lot of integration tests for TDD and all the bells and whistles Jest provides you from the command-line I just don't need. And I certainly do not care about or touch Jest Snapshots, I despise them

  • My tests are fast enough because I write isolated tests with TDD, so I don't run into performance issues. Example: I write my tests in a way that I can run 300 tests in literally 1 second with mocha. So the Jest ability to pinpoint and only run those tests which are affected by code changes. I want to run all of them every time when I TDD. It's a different mindset when you TDD

  • I also mainly code in IntelliJ or WebStorm because I feel the tools in that IDE far surpass VSCode and I also love running the test UI runner in it vs. lousy command-line

  • I feel both mocha and Jest read just fine in terms of code readability. Jest might have shorter assertion syntax but I don't really care. I just care that I can read the damn test and my tests are written well and my test descriptions, as well as the code itself including constants represent business language, not technical. I care most about BDD, clean code, 4 rules of simple design, and SOLID

  • I don't like using mock frameworks so no I don't use Jest's Mocking framework. I don't have to mock a lot in my tests due to the nature of how I strive to code...I keep my design simple and modular using principals such as clean code and 4 rules of simple design. If I must mock, I create very simple custom mocks with JS

  • On the contrary to the belief that integration tests and mount are the way to go (this belief drives me absolutely crazy, especially Dodd's promoting that), I TDD with shallow & enzyme. My tests are simple. My design is driven by my tests and my tests give me quick and useful feedback. I have a course I'm working on coming out soon on TDD with React to show you how to truly test the FE and why the ice cream cone and trophy suck (you're being scammed people). Watch for that here: https://twitter.com/DaveSchinkel/status/1062267649235791873

Don't forget to upvote this post!

Mocha Jest JavaScript React @jsdom Enzyme #tdd #bdd #testdrivendevelopment

See more
Jest logo

Jest

9.5K
3.9K
175
Painless JavaScript Unit Testing
9.5K
3.9K
+ 1
175
PROS OF JEST
  • 36
    Open source
  • 32
    Mock by default makes testing much simpler
  • 23
    Testing React Native Apps
  • 20
    Parallel test running
  • 16
    Fast
  • 13
    Bundled with JSDOM to enable DOM testing
  • 8
    Mock by default screws up your classes, breaking tests
  • 7
    Out of the box code coverage
  • 7
    Promise support
  • 6
    One stop shop for unit testing
  • 3
    Great documentation
  • 2
    Assert Library Included
  • 1
    Built in watch option with interactive filtering menu
  • 1
    Preset support
  • 0
    Can be used for BDD
  • 0
    Karma
CONS OF JEST
  • 4
    Documentation
  • 4
    Ambiguous configuration
  • 3
    Difficult
  • 2
    Many bugs still not fixed months/years after reporting
  • 2
    Multiple error messages for same error
  • 2
    Difficult to run single test/describe/file
  • 2
    Ambiguous
  • 2
    Bugged
  • 1
    BeforeAll timing out makes all passing tests fail
  • 1
    Slow
  • 1
    Reporter is too general
  • 1
    Unstable
  • 1
    Bad docs
  • 1
    Still does't support .mjs files natively
  • 1
    Can't fail beforeAll to abort tests
  • 0
    Interaction with watch mode on terminal

related Jest posts

Simon Reymann
Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 23 upvotes · 4.8M views

Our whole Vue.js frontend stack (incl. SSR) consists of the following tools:

  • Nuxt.js consisting of Vue CLI, Vue Router, vuex, Webpack and Sass (Bundler for HTML5, CSS 3), Babel (Transpiler for JavaScript),
  • Vue Styleguidist as our style guide and pool of developed Vue.js components
  • Vuetify as Material Component Framework (for fast app development)
  • TypeScript as programming language
  • Apollo / GraphQL (incl. GraphiQL) for data access layer (https://apollo.vuejs.org/)
  • ESLint, TSLint and Prettier for coding style and code analyzes
  • Jest as testing framework
  • Google Fonts and Font Awesome for typography and icon toolkit
  • NativeScript-Vue for mobile development

The main reason we have chosen Vue.js over React and AngularJS is related to the following artifacts:

  • Empowered HTML. Vue.js has many similar approaches with Angular. This helps to optimize HTML blocks handling with the use of different components.
  • Detailed documentation. Vue.js has very good documentation which can fasten learning curve for developers.
  • Adaptability. It provides a rapid switching period from other frameworks. It has similarities with Angular and React in terms of design and architecture.
  • Awesome integration. Vue.js can be used for both building single-page applications and more difficult web interfaces of apps. Smaller interactive parts can be easily integrated into the existing infrastructure with no negative effect on the entire system.
  • Large scaling. Vue.js can help to develop pretty large reusable templates.
  • Tiny size. Vue.js weights around 20KB keeping its speed and flexibility. It allows reaching much better performance in comparison to other frameworks.
See more

I'm working as one of the engineering leads in RunaHR. As our platform is a Saas, we thought It'd be good to have an API (We chose Ruby and Rails for this) and a SPA (built with React and Redux ) connected. We started the SPA with Create React App since It's pretty easy to start.

We use Jest as the testing framework and react-testing-library to test React components. In Rails we make tests using RSpec.

Our main database is PostgreSQL, but we also use MongoDB to store some type of data. We started to use Redis  for cache and other time sensitive operations.

We have a couple of extra projects: One is an Employee app built with React Native and the other is an internal back office dashboard built with Next.js for the client and Python in the backend side.

Since we have different frontend apps we have found useful to have Bit to document visual components and utils in JavaScript.

See more
Jasmine logo

Jasmine

2.6K
1.5K
186
DOM-less simple JavaScript testing framework
2.6K
1.5K
+ 1
186
PROS OF JASMINE
  • 64
    Can also be used for tdd
  • 49
    Open source
  • 18
    Originally from RSpec
  • 15
    Great community
  • 14
    No dependencies, not even DOM
  • 10
    Easy to setup
  • 8
    Simple
  • 3
    Created by Pivotal-Labs
  • 2
    Works with KarmaJs
  • 1
    Jasmine is faster than selenium in angular application
  • 1
    SpyOn to fake calls
  • 1
    Async and promises are easy calls with "done"
CONS OF JASMINE
  • 2
    Unfriendly error logs

related Jasmine posts

Joshua Dean Küpper
CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 7 upvotes · 609.1K views

For our internal team and collaboration panel we use Nuxt.js (with TypeScript that is transpiled into ES6), Webpack and npm. We enjoy the opinionated nature of Nuxt.js over vanilla Vue.js, as we would end up using all of the components Nuxt.js incorporates anyways and we can adhere to the conventions setup by the Nuxt.js project, which allows us to get better support in case we run into any dead ends. Webpack allows us to create reproducable builds and also debug our application with hot reloads, which greately increased the pace at which we are able to perform and test changes. We also incorporated a lot of testing (ESLint, Chai, Jasmine, Nightwatchjs) into our pipelines and can trigger those jobs through GitLab CI. All packages are fetched through npm, so that we can keep our git repositories slim and are notified of new updates aswell as reported security flaws.

See more
Sai Chaitanya Mankala
Tech Lead at KIOT Innovations · | 6 upvotes · 865.6K views

Protractor or Cypress for ionic-angular?

We have a huge ionic-angular app with almost 100 pages and 10+ injectables. There are no tests written yet. Before we start, we need some suggestions about the framework. Would you suggest Cypress or Angular's Protractor with Jasmine / Karma for a heavy ionic app with Angular?

See more
JUnit logo

JUnit

4.1K
614
0
A programmer-oriented testing framework for Java
4.1K
614
+ 1
0
PROS OF JUNIT
    Be the first to leave a pro
    CONS OF JUNIT
      Be the first to leave a con

      related JUnit posts

      Jack Graves

      We use JUnit and Jest to perform the bulk of our automated test scenarios, with additional work with Apache JMeter for performance testing - for example, the Atlassian Data Center compliance testing is performed with JMeter. Jest provides testing for the React interfaces, which make up the backend of our App offerings. JUnit is used for Unit Testing our Server-based Apps. Mocha is another tool we use.

      See more

      We are looking for a Testing Tool that can integrate with Java/ React/ Go/ Python/ Node.js. Which amongst the three tools JUnit, NUnit & Selenium would be the best for this use case?

      See more
      Selenium logo

      Selenium

      15.5K
      12.4K
      526
      Web Browser Automation
      15.5K
      12.4K
      + 1
      526
      PROS OF SELENIUM
      • 176
        Automates browsers
      • 154
        Testing
      • 101
        Essential tool for running test automation
      • 24
        Record-Playback
      • 24
        Remote Control
      • 8
        Data crawling
      • 7
        Supports end to end testing
      • 6
        Easy set up
      • 6
        Functional testing
      • 4
        The Most flexible monitoring system
      • 3
        End to End Testing
      • 3
        Easy to integrate with build tools
      • 2
        Comparing the performance selenium is faster than jasm
      • 2
        Record and playback
      • 2
        Compatible with Python
      • 2
        Easy to scale
      • 2
        Integration Tests
      • 0
        Integrated into Selenium-Jupiter framework
      CONS OF SELENIUM
      • 8
        Flaky tests
      • 4
        Slow as needs to make browser (even with no gui)
      • 2
        Update browser drivers

      related Selenium posts

      Kamil Kowalski
      Lead Architect at Fresha · | 28 upvotes · 3.9M views

      When you think about test automation, it’s crucial to make it everyone’s responsibility (not just QA Engineers'). We started with Selenium and Java, but with our platform revolving around Ruby, Elixir and JavaScript, QA Engineers were left alone to automate tests. Cypress was the answer, as we could switch to JS and simply involve more people from day one. There's a downside too, as it meant testing on Chrome only, but that was "good enough" for us + if really needed we can always cover some specific cases in a different way.

      See more
      Benjamin Poon
      QA Manager - Engineering at HBC Digital · | 8 upvotes · 2.2M views

      For our digital QA organization to support a complex hybrid monolith/microservice architecture, our team took on the lofty goal of building out a commonized UI test automation framework. One of the primary requisites included a technical minimalist threshold such that an engineer or analyst with fundamental knowledge of JavaScript could automate their tests with greater ease. Just to list a few: - Nightwatchjs - Selenium - Cucumber - GitHub - Go.CD - Docker - ExpressJS - React - PostgreSQL

      With this structure, we're able to combine the automation efforts of each team member into a centralized repository while also providing new relevant metrics to business owners.

      See more
      Chai logo

      Chai

      3.9K
      193
      0
      A BDD / TDD assertion library
      3.9K
      193
      + 1
      0
      PROS OF CHAI
        Be the first to leave a pro
        CONS OF CHAI
          Be the first to leave a con

          related Chai posts

          Anurag Maurya

          Needs advice on code coverage tool in Node.js/ExpressJS with External API Testing Framework

          Hello community,

          I have a web application with the backend developed using Node.js and Express.js. The backend server is in one directory, and I have a separate API testing framework, made using SuperTest, Mocha, and Chai, in another directory. The testing framework pings the API, retrieves responses, and performs validations.

          I'm currently looking for a code coverage tool that can accurately measure the code coverage of my backend code when triggered by the API testing framework. I've tried using Istanbul and NYC with instrumented code, but the results are not as expected.

          Could you please recommend a reliable code coverage tool or suggest an approach to effectively measure the code coverage of my Node.js/Express.js backend code in this setup?

          See more
          Joshua Dean Küpper
          CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 7 upvotes · 609.1K views

          For our internal team and collaboration panel we use Nuxt.js (with TypeScript that is transpiled into ES6), Webpack and npm. We enjoy the opinionated nature of Nuxt.js over vanilla Vue.js, as we would end up using all of the components Nuxt.js incorporates anyways and we can adhere to the conventions setup by the Nuxt.js project, which allows us to get better support in case we run into any dead ends. Webpack allows us to create reproducable builds and also debug our application with hot reloads, which greately increased the pace at which we are able to perform and test changes. We also incorporated a lot of testing (ESLint, Chai, Jasmine, Nightwatchjs) into our pipelines and can trigger those jobs through GitLab CI. All packages are fetched through npm, so that we can keep our git repositories slim and are notified of new updates aswell as reported security flaws.

          See more
          JavaScript logo

          JavaScript

          353.2K
          268.7K
          8.1K
          Lightweight, interpreted, object-oriented language with first-class functions
          353.2K
          268.7K
          + 1
          8.1K
          PROS OF JAVASCRIPT
          • 1.7K
            Can be used on frontend/backend
          • 1.5K
            It's everywhere
          • 1.2K
            Lots of great frameworks
          • 897
            Fast
          • 745
            Light weight
          • 425
            Flexible
          • 392
            You can't get a device today that doesn't run js
          • 286
            Non-blocking i/o
          • 237
            Ubiquitousness
          • 191
            Expressive
          • 55
            Extended functionality to web pages
          • 49
            Relatively easy language
          • 46
            Executed on the client side
          • 30
            Relatively fast to the end user
          • 25
            Pure Javascript
          • 21
            Functional programming
          • 15
            Async
          • 13
            Full-stack
          • 12
            Setup is easy
          • 12
            Future Language of The Web
          • 12
            Its everywhere
          • 11
            Because I love functions
          • 11
            JavaScript is the New PHP
          • 10
            Like it or not, JS is part of the web standard
          • 9
            Expansive community
          • 9
            Everyone use it
          • 9
            Can be used in backend, frontend and DB
          • 9
            Easy
          • 8
            Most Popular Language in the World
          • 8
            Powerful
          • 8
            Can be used both as frontend and backend as well
          • 8
            For the good parts
          • 8
            No need to use PHP
          • 8
            Easy to hire developers
          • 7
            Agile, packages simple to use
          • 7
            Love-hate relationship
          • 7
            Photoshop has 3 JS runtimes built in
          • 7
            Evolution of C
          • 7
            It's fun
          • 7
            Hard not to use
          • 7
            Versitile
          • 7
            Its fun and fast
          • 7
            Nice
          • 7
            Popularized Class-Less Architecture & Lambdas
          • 7
            Supports lambdas and closures
          • 6
            It let's me use Babel & Typescript
          • 6
            Can be used on frontend/backend/Mobile/create PRO Ui
          • 6
            1.6K Can be used on frontend/backend
          • 6
            Client side JS uses the visitors CPU to save Server Res
          • 6
            Easy to make something
          • 5
            Clojurescript
          • 5
            Promise relationship
          • 5
            Stockholm Syndrome
          • 5
            Function expressions are useful for callbacks
          • 5
            Scope manipulation
          • 5
            Everywhere
          • 5
            Client processing
          • 5
            What to add
          • 4
            Because it is so simple and lightweight
          • 4
            Only Programming language on browser
          • 1
            Test
          • 1
            Hard to learn
          • 1
            Test2
          • 1
            Not the best
          • 1
            Easy to understand
          • 1
            Subskill #4
          • 1
            Easy to learn
          • 0
            Hard 彤
          CONS OF JAVASCRIPT
          • 22
            A constant moving target, too much churn
          • 20
            Horribly inconsistent
          • 15
            Javascript is the New PHP
          • 9
            No ability to monitor memory utilitization
          • 8
            Shows Zero output in case of ANY error
          • 7
            Thinks strange results are better than errors
          • 6
            Can be ugly
          • 3
            No GitHub
          • 2
            Slow

          related JavaScript posts

          Zach Holman

          Oof. I have truly hated JavaScript for a long time. Like, for over twenty years now. Like, since the Clinton administration. It's always been a nightmare to deal with all of the aspects of that silly language.

          But wowza, things have changed. Tooling is just way, way better. I'm primarily web-oriented, and using React and Apollo together the past few years really opened my eyes to building rich apps. And I deeply apologize for using the phrase rich apps; I don't think I've ever said such Enterprisey words before.

          But yeah, things are different now. I still love Rails, and still use it for a lot of apps I build. But it's that silly rich apps phrase that's the problem. Users have way more comprehensive expectations than they did even five years ago, and the JS community does a good job at building tools and tech that tackle the problems of making heavy, complicated UI and frontend work.

          Obviously there's a lot of things happening here, so just saying "JavaScript isn't terrible" might encompass a huge amount of libraries and frameworks. But if you're like me, yeah, give things another shot- I'm somehow not hating on JavaScript anymore and... gulp... I kinda love it.

          See more
          Conor Myhrvold
          Tech Brand Mgr, Office of CTO at Uber · | 44 upvotes · 10.9M 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
          Git logo

          Git

          292.3K
          175.2K
          6.6K
          Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
          292.3K
          175.2K
          + 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 · 9.8M 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 · 8.8M 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