Argo vs Spinnaker: What are the differences?

Comparison between Argo and Spinnaker

Argo and Spinnaker are two popular open-source tools used for cloud-native application deployment and management. While both tools aim to simplify the deployment process and offer advanced features, there are several key differences between them.

1. Workflow execution: Argo provides a more flexible and customizable workflow execution model compared to Spinnaker. With Argo, users can define complex workflows using a declarative Yaml file, allowing for greater control and customization. Spinnaker, on the other hand, follows a more prescriptive pipeline-based approach, which can be easier to get started with but may lack some of the fine-grained control that Argo offers.

2. Kubernetes-native: Argo is designed specifically for Kubernetes and leverages its underlying features and functionalities to provide seamless integration. It offers native support for Kubernetes resources and runs directly within the Kubernetes cluster, making it an ideal choice for organizations heavily invested in Kubernetes. Spinnaker, while also capable of deploying to Kubernetes, is a more general-purpose tool that can work with multiple cloud providers and non-Kubernetes environments, making it more versatile but potentially requiring more configuration.

3. Community and ecosystem: Spinnaker has been around for a longer time and has a more mature and established community compared to Argo. Spinnaker has a larger user base, extensive documentation, and a wide range of plugins and integrations available, making it a more robust and well-supported choice for enterprise deployments. On the other hand, Argo is gaining popularity rapidly, especially within the Kubernetes community, and has an active and growing community, but its ecosystem may not be as extensive as that of Spinnaker yet.

4. CD tooling: Spinnaker offers a rich set of built-in continuous delivery (CD) tooling and features, including advanced deployment strategies like canary deployments and rolling updates. These features make it a more comprehensive and feature-rich CD platform compared to Argo. While Argo provides basic CD capabilities, it may require additional tools or customizations to achieve the same level of CD feature set as Spinnaker.

5. Integration with other tools: Spinnaker has better integration capabilities with other tools commonly used in the Continuous Integration/Continuous Delivery (CI/CD) pipeline. It has built-in support for popular CI tools like Jenkins and Travis CI, and also integrates with artifact repositories like Artifactory and Docker Registry seamlessly. Argo, while being extensible and customizable, may require additional effort for integrating with other tools and services outside the Kubernetes ecosystem.

6. User interface and user experience: Spinnaker provides a highly intuitive and feature-rich web-based user interface (UI), which enables users to easily manage and visualize application deployments. The UI offers a comprehensive view of deployment pipelines and stages, making it easy to track the progress and status of deployments. Argo, on the other hand, offers a more minimalistic UI, primarily driven through command-line interface (CLI) interactions, which may require a steeper learning curve and may not provide the same level of visual representation as Spinnaker.

In summary, Argo offers a more flexible workflow execution model and deep integration with Kubernetes, while Spinnaker excels in its extensive CD tooling, larger community, and better integration with other tools commonly used in the CI/CD pipeline. The choice between Argo and Spinnaker ultimately depends on the specific requirements and ecosystem of the organization.