Azure Artifacts vs. Pulp

Share codes and packages across the whole organization. We have developers most of the time work from home or overseas like in India. We can test and deploy the package when they deploy the new changes into the Azure Artifacts. Azure Artifact can promote our package to the correct system like DEV, UAT, or Production. It also provides retention policies to automatically clean up expired packages.

Incentivized

I understand that this tool may not be for everyone, but it served its purpose perfectly for us. It allows us to safely change to older repositories in case we need to roll back any changes. It has definitely reduced operational costs for us due to allowing us to safely manage our own packages without relying solely on external providers, which are not always reliable. However, it's worth mentioning that the setup/maintenance can be a little bit fiddly for some users. There's a learning curve here, but, to us, it was totally worth it.

• Security feature on share code efficiently.
• The built in CI/CD for the software pipeline.
• Support for most famous build tool like maven and npm.

Incentivized

• Native artifact format support like docker image
• Support for APL
• Support IAM permission

Incentivized

Azure Artifact is based on GitHub which is the best artifact at all times. Helm is open source and we may have security concerns. Crucible is a good tool but does not of a lot of support. I prefer that Azure Artifact is a solid product and with a good gene from the GitHub codebase.

Incentivized

• The artifact provide best practice to our software development.
• Provide a standard way to release the software.
• The package is immutability which means no one can update it after release.

Incentivized