Codefresh vs. GNU Make

While deploying docker images on kubernetes pods I must say Codefresh helped me a lot. It has made my work easy as an Automation tool. I can setup a simple pipelines to automate my build for kubernetes. but for more complex pipelines Codefresh need some improvement

Incentivized

GNU Make is a great tool for simple builds where language-specific options are not available, or to provide shortcuts for common commands (e.g., "make build" as shorthand for "go build ..." with a bunch of flags). However, it is complementary to other build systems. It does not replace them, which is perhaps one of its greatest strengths as well (works with existing ecosystem instead of trying to do everything). GMU Make it simple to get started with, and the philosophy of understanding how sources map to outputs, as well as the dependency graph, are beneficial.

Incentivized

• Continuous Integration and Continuous Development. we can setup jobs that automatically triggered when there is any changes in code and starts building up the build images automatically and then pushing images to Container Registry
• We can involve Version control system like github, bitbucket, gitlab etc for integration of Codefresh with our code stored in these Version control systems.
• On the failure of any jobs/pipeline Codefresh can also send Notification on our email.

Incentivized

• Performance and accuracy of cross-module dependencies.
• Simple to write and easy to understand.

Incentivized

• With Codefresh it's become hard to handle complex pipelines
• Need to focus more on Documentation part
• UI can be more attractive
• Security can be more increased

Incentivized

• No dependency management tools (but there are no cross-platform tools of this type anyway)
• Tedious to do cross-compilation (Debug & Release builds, 32- and 64-bit builds, x86/ARM builds)

Incentivized

In general, it is fair to say the support is sufficient although we do not deal with support directly. There are a lot of forum people chiming in with suggestions or recommendations of particular usage or issues we run into. Since it is open software, patch and fixes will be available from time to time. A lot of information is available in the web now for knowing GNU Make from learning, example, teaching, etc.

Incentivized

It's very scalable It is cost effective It easily get integrated with third party tools It easily get integrated with Kubernetes Docker.

Incentivized

I'm a full-stack developer that has used various build tools, including Maven, Gradle, and NPM/yarn. For our C projects, I also investigated CMake and Ninja, but they seemed more difficult to learn and more tedious to work with. GNU Make is a single binary that can be easily downloaded, even for Windows under MingW32, is straightforward to learn, and works pretty well despite its age.

Incentivized

• Positive:
• As an Automation tools I must say it has reduced manual labour , reduced errors and improved quality of work.
• It easily get integrated with third party tools which increases ease ness in our work
• Negative:
• Although being a very good tools in CI/CD
• It requires improvement in UI, it's speed, security, optimization.

Incentivized

• Streamline the build based on a lot of existing component being done, reusable.
• Commonly understandable, therefore, rampup effort is small.

Incentivized