CircleCI is a software delivery engine from the company of the same name in San Francisco, that helps teams ship software faster, offering their platform for Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery (CI/CD). Ultimately, the solution helps to map every source of change for software teams, so they can accelerate innovation and growth.
$0
for up to 6,000 build minutes and up to 5 active users per month
SonarQube Server
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
SonarQube is a code quality and vulnerability solution for development teams that integrates with CI/CD pipelines to ensure the software you produce is secure, reliable, and maintainable.
I personally evaluated klocwork in a previous company and it worked well for Static Code Analysis for C++ applications but the Java support was not as good as SonarQube.
Also the overall tooling and integrations provided by SonarQube is stellar and very other competitors can …
CircleCI is perfect for a CI/CD pipeline for an app using a standard build process. It'll take more work for a complex build process, but should still be up to the task unless you need a lot of integrations with other tools. If you have a big team and can spare someone to focus full time on just the CI/CD tools, maybe something like Jenkins is better, but if you're just looking to get your app built, tested, and delivered without a huge amount of effort, CircleCI is probably your preferred tool.
SonarQube is excellent if you start using it at the beginning when developing a new system, in this situation you will be able to fix things before they become spread and expensive to correct. It’s a bit less suitable to use on existing code with bad design as it’s usually too expensive to fix everything and only allows you to ensure the situation doesn’t get worse.
Detecting bugs and vulnerabilities: SonarQube can identify a wide range of bugs and vulnerabilities in code, such as null pointer exceptions, SQL injection, and cross-site scripting (XSS) attacks. It uses static analysis to analyze the code and identify potential issues, and it can also integrate with dynamic analysis tools to provide even more detailed analysis.
Measuring code quality: SonarQube can measure a wide range of code quality metrics, such as cyclomatic complexity, duplicated code, and code coverage. This can help teams understand the quality of their code and identify areas that need improvement.
Providing actionable insights: SonarQube provides detailed information about issues in the code, including the file and line number where the issue occurs and the severity of the issue. This makes it easy for developers to understand and address issues in the code.
Integrating with other tools: SonarQube can be integrated with a wide range of development tools and programming languages, such as Git, Maven, and Java. This allows teams to use SonarQube in their existing development workflow and take advantage of its powerful code analysis capabilities.
Managing technical debt: SonarQube provides metrics and insights on the technical debt on the codebase, enabling teams to better prioritize issues to improve the quality of the code.
Compliance with coding standards: SonarQube can check the code against industry standards like OWASP, CWE and more, making sure the code is compliant with security and coding standards.
The "phases" their config file uses to separate out options seem very arbitrary and are not very helpful for organizing your config file
No way that I know of to configure which version of MongoDB you use. You have to write your own shell script to download and start MongoDB if you want a specific version.
Importing a new custom quality profile on SonarQube is a bit tricky, it can be made easier
Every second time when we want to rerun the server, we have to restart the whole system, otherwise, the server stops and closes automatically
When we generate a new report a second time and try to access the report, it shows details of the old report only and takes a lot of time to get updated with the details of the new and fresh report generated
It's pretty snappy, even with using workflows with multiple steps and different docker images. I've seen builds take a long time if it's really involved, but from what I can tell, it's still at least on par if not faster than other build tools.
Unless you have a reasonably large account, you're going to be mainly stuck reading their documentation. Which has improved somewhat over the years but is still extremely limited compared to a platform like Digital Ocean who invested in the documentation and a community to ensure it's kept up to date. If you can't find your answer there, you can be stuck.
We we easily able to integrate the SonarQube steps into our TFS process via the Microsoft Marektplace, we didn't have the need to call SonarQube support. We've used their online documentation and community forum if we ran into any issues.
Circle was the first CI with simple setup, great documentation, and tight integration with GitHub. Using Jenkins was too much maintenance and overhead, TeamCity was limited in how we could customize it and run concurrent builds, TravisCI was not available for private repos when we switched.
SonarQube is an open-source. It's a scalable product. The costs for this application, for the kind of job it does, are pretty descent. Pipeline scan is more secured in SonarQube. Its a very good tool and its support multiple languages. Its main core competency is of static code analysis and that is why SonarQube exists and it does it exceedingly well. The quality of scan on code convention, best practices, coding standards, unit test coverage etc makes them one of the best competent tool in the market
It has eased the burden of standardizing our testing and deployment, making onboarding new developers much faster, and having to fix deployment mistakes much less often.
It allows us to focus our process around the GitHub workflow, ignoring the details of whatever environment the thing we're working on is actually hosted in. This saves us time.
Positive ROI from the standpoint of flagging several issues that would have otherwise likely been unaddressed and caused more time to be spent closer to launch
Slightly positive ROI from time-saving perspective (it's an automated check which is nice, but depending on the issues it finds, can take developers time to investigate and resolve)
