Apache Maven vs. Spinnaker

Building and automating packaging of software can be a challenging task. As the complexity of the project grows so do the dependencies on third-party artifacts. Using Maven we can define and manage the project structure centrally and it helps improve overall build times.

Incentivized

Spinnaker is a strong solution for Continuous Deployment being able to manage enormous environments in an easy way. Even Spinnaker being able to manage environments based on cloud instances (ec2 for example) I believe it is more suitable for containerized environments. Mainly in Kubernetes where it excels as a reliable and safe tool

Incentivized

• Makes the build process simple and easy to do.
• It provides a standard build system that can be adopted by multiple, different groups within an organization.
• It's extensible with easy to use custom extensions which our developers take full advantage of.

Incentivized

• The immutable way of deployment is one of its greatest advantages.
• We have a strict policy to restock our instances with new images very frequently and this can be done very seamlessly via Spinnaker
• Rollback/ resize of clusters is one of the coolest features of Spinnaker.

Incentivized

• One of the issues with building software using Apache Maven is that its cache resolution is not optimal. It pulls down all the artifacts onto the developer's local machine and can sometimes result in conflicts.
• The build process can vary in time and gets progressively longer as the project's complexity increases.

Incentivized

• Integration with external authentication mechanism is not that simple.
• Its configuration is made by a external tool (halyard). Would be better if we could configure it by using its own frontend.
• Its user interface is some times a bit confusing.

Incentivized

The overall usability of Apache Maven is very good to us. We were able to incorporate it into our company's build process pretty quickly. We deployed it to multiple teams throughout the entire enterprise. We got good feedback from our developers stating that Apache Maven has simplified their build process. It also allowed to to standardize the build process for the entire enterprise, thus ensure that each development team is using the same, consistent process to build code.

Incentivized

I can't speak to the support, as I've never had issues. Apache Maven "just works," and errors were user errors or local nexus errors. Apache Maven is a great build/dependency management tool. I give it a 9/10 because occasionally the error message don't immediately indicate a solution...but again, those errors were always user or configuration errors, and the Maven documentation is extensive, so I don't find fault in Maven, but in its users.

Incentivized

Ant is useful if your build is heavily based on customs scripts running in the right order. Maven greatly simplifies the process to keep track of and download build dependencies compared with Apache Ant. If your build is based on multiple custom scripts running in a specific order there is a lot of overhead in Maven compared to Apache Ant.

Incentivized

• Pipeline Expressiveness • Self-Service/Override • Visibility of Client Teams • Operability of Client Teams - • High-Quality Integrations (AWS, IHP, Google) • Extensibility – (Ability to add code) • The maturity of Deployment Process • Speed/Ease of Onboarding

Incentivized

• Maven has been the only tool for building Java apps for a long time. And it being open source has helped maximize ROI.
• I can't think of any negative. With Gradle coming up as a newer and better technology for building, some teams are shifting towards it.

Incentivized

• It's open source!
• RPM based deployments can be scripted at Maven file itself , so very easy!
• RPM based deployments bundles all code and configs together, so awesome!

Incentivized