DeployHQ vs Jenkins

Overview

Jenkins

Stacks59.2K

Followers50.4K

Votes2.2K

GitHub Stars24.6K

Forks9.2K

DeployHQ

Stacks24

Followers39

Votes0

DeployHQ vs Jenkins: What are the differences?

Deployment Workflow: DeployHQ is a cloud-based tool focused primarily on automating deployment workflows, while Jenkins is a continuous integration server that supports deployment as one of its features. DeployHQ provides a streamlined process for deploying code to servers, while Jenkins requires more configuration to set up deployment pipelines.
User Interface: DeployHQ offers a user-friendly and intuitive interface designed for easier navigation and setup of deployment tasks without technical expertise. In contrast, Jenkins is more complex and requires a steeper learning curve due to its wide range of features and customization options, making it more suitable for advanced users and larger projects.
Integration Capabilities: DeployHQ easily integrates with popular version control systems like Git and SVN, as well as various third-party services such as Slack and HipChat for notifications. Jenkins, on the other hand, has a vast plugin ecosystem that allows integration with a wide range of tools and services for a highly customizable CI/CD setup.
Scalability: Jenkins is known for its ability to scale horizontally to accommodate larger projects and complex pipelines by distributing workload across multiple build agents. DeployHQ, while efficient for smaller to medium-sized projects, may face limitations in handling large-scale deployments and parallel builds.
Maintenance and Support: DeployHQ, being a hosted solution, requires minimal maintenance and provides reliable customer support for any deployment-related issues. Jenkins, as a self-hosted tool, demands more maintenance in terms of updates, security patches, and configuration, and often relies on community forums for support.
Cost Structure: DeployHQ offers a straightforward pricing model based on the number of deployments and users, making it easier to forecast costs for teams of all sizes. Jenkins, being open-source, is free to use, but the cost of maintaining infrastructure, plugins, and potential downtime should be considered when evaluating the total cost of ownership.

In Summary, DeployHQ simplifies deployment workflows with a user-friendly interface and straightforward pricing, while Jenkins offers greater customization and scalability but requires more technical expertise and maintenance.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Jenkins, DeployHQ

Balaramesh

Apr 20, 2020

Needs adviceon

Azure Pipelines

.NET

Jenkins

We are currently using Azure Pipelines for continous integration. Our applications are developed witn .NET framework. But when we look at the online Jenkins is the most widely used tool for continous integration. Can you please give me the advice which one is best to use for my case Azure pipeline or jenkins.

663k views663k

Comments

StackShare

Apr 17, 2019

Needs advice

From a StackShare Community member: "Currently we use Travis CI and have optimized it as much as we can so our builds are fairly quick. Our boss is all about redundancy so we are looking for another solution to fall back on in case Travis goes down and/or jacks prices way up (they were recently acquired). Could someone recommend which CI we should go with and if they have time, an explanation of how they're different?"

529k views529k

Comments

Tatiana

Nov 16, 2019

Decided

Jenkins is a pretty flexible, complete tool. Especially I love the possibility to configure jobs as a code with Jenkins pipelines.

CircleCI is well suited for small projects where the main task is to run continuous integration as quickly as possible. Travis CI is recommended primarily for open-source projects that need to be tested in different environments.

And for something a bit larger I prefer to use Jenkins because it is possible to make serious system configuration thereby different plugins. In Jenkins, I can change almost anything. But if you want to start the CI chain as soon as possible, Jenkins may not be the right choice.

734k views734k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Jenkins	DeployHQ
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.	A service packed with features to help you automate and manage the continuous deployment of your websites.
Easy installation;Easy configuration;Change set support;Permanent links;RSS/E-mail/IM Integration;After-the-fact tagging;JUnit/TestNG test reporting;Distributed builds;File fingerprinting;Plugin Support	Zero Downtime Deployments; Build Pipelines; Deployment Targets; Automatic Deployment; Deployment Templates Deploy Behind Firewalls; Powerful Integrations; Mobile App
Statistics
GitHub Stars 24.6K	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 9.2K	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 59.2K	Stacks 24
Followers 50.4K	Followers 39
Votes 2.2K	Votes 0
Pros & Cons
Pros 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 Cons 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	No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available	Bugsnag Bitbucket New Relic Sentry GitLab GitHub Discord Honeybadger CloudFlare Rollbar

What are some alternatives to Jenkins, DeployHQ?

Travis CI

Free for open source projects, our CI environment provides multiple runtimes (e.g. Node.js or PHP versions), data stores and so on. Because of this, hosting your project on travis-ci.com means you can effortlessly test your library or applications against multiple runtimes and data stores without even having all of them installed locally.

Codeship

Codeship runs your automated tests and configured deployment when you push to your repository. It takes care of managing and scaling the infrastructure so that you are able to test and release more frequently and get faster feedback for building the product your users need.

CircleCI

Continuous integration and delivery platform helps software teams rapidly release code with confidence by automating the build, test, and deploy process. Offers a modern software development platform that lets teams ramp.

Buddy

Git platform for web and software developers with Docker-based tools for Continuous Integration and Deployment.

TeamCity

TeamCity is a user-friendly continuous integration (CI) server for professional developers, build engineers, and DevOps. It is trivial to setup and absolutely free for small teams and open source projects.

Drone.io

Drone is a hosted continuous integration service. It enables you to conveniently set up projects to automatically build, test, and deploy as you make changes to your code. Drone integrates seamlessly with Github, Bitbucket and Google Code as well as third party services such as Heroku, Dotcloud, Google AppEngine and more.

wercker

Wercker is a CI/CD developer automation platform designed for Microservices & Container Architecture.

GoCD

GoCD is an open source continuous delivery server created by ThoughtWorks. GoCD offers business a first-class build and deployment engine for complete control and visibility.

Shippable

Shippable is a SaaS platform that lets you easily add Continuous Integration/Deployment to your Github and BitBucket repositories. It is lightweight, super simple to setup, and runs your builds and tests faster than any other service.

Buildkite

CI and build automation tool that combines the power of your own build infrastructure with the convenience of a managed, centralized web UI. Used by Shopify, Basecamp, Digital Ocean, Venmo, Cochlear, Bugsnag and more.

Related Comparisons

DeployHQ vs Jenkins: What are the differences?

Deployment Workflow: DeployHQ is a cloud-based tool focused primarily on automating deployment workflows, while Jenkins is a continuous integration server that supports deployment as one of its features. DeployHQ provides a streamlined process for deploying code to servers, while Jenkins requires more configuration to set up deployment pipelines.
User Interface: DeployHQ offers a user-friendly and intuitive interface designed for easier navigation and setup of deployment tasks without technical expertise. In contrast, Jenkins is more complex and requires a steeper learning curve due to its wide range of features and customization options, making it more suitable for advanced users and larger projects.
Integration Capabilities: DeployHQ easily integrates with popular version control systems like Git and SVN, as well as various third-party services such as Slack and HipChat for notifications. Jenkins, on the other hand, has a vast plugin ecosystem that allows integration with a wide range of tools and services for a highly customizable CI/CD setup.
Scalability: Jenkins is known for its ability to scale horizontally to accommodate larger projects and complex pipelines by distributing workload across multiple build agents. DeployHQ, while efficient for smaller to medium-sized projects, may face limitations in handling large-scale deployments and parallel builds.
Maintenance and Support: DeployHQ, being a hosted solution, requires minimal maintenance and provides reliable customer support for any deployment-related issues. Jenkins, as a self-hosted tool, demands more maintenance in terms of updates, security patches, and configuration, and often relies on community forums for support.
Cost Structure: DeployHQ offers a straightforward pricing model based on the number of deployments and users, making it easier to forecast costs for teams of all sizes. Jenkins, being open-source, is free to use, but the cost of maintaining infrastructure, plugins, and potential downtime should be considered when evaluating the total cost of ownership.

DeployHQ vs Jenkins

Overview