Codefresh vs. GoCD

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

Previously, our team used Jenkins. However, since it's a shared deployment resource we don't have admin access. We tried GoCD as it's open source and we really like. We set up our deployment pipeline to run whenever codes are merged to master, run the unit test and revert back if it doesn't pass. Once it's deployed to the staging environment, we can simply do 1-click to deploy the appropriate version to production. We use this to deploy to an on-prem server and also AWS. Some deployment pipelines use custom Powershell script for.Net application, some others use Bash script to execute the docker push and cloud formation template to build elastic beanstalk.

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

• Pipeline-as-Code works really well. All our pipelines are defined in yml files, which are checked into SCM.
• The ability to link multiple pipelines together is really cool. Later pipelines can declare a dependency to pick up the build artifacts of earlier ones.
• Agents definition is really great. We can define multiple different kinds of environments to best suit our diverse build systems.

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

• UI can be improved
• Location for settings can be re-arranged
• API for setting up pipeline

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

GoCD is easier to setup, but harder to customize at runtime. There's no way to trigger a pipeline with custom parameters.

Jenkins is more flexible at runtime. You can define multiple user-provided parameters so when user needs to trigger a build, there's a form for him/her to input the parameters.

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

• ROI has been good since it's open source
• Settings.xml need to be backed up periodically. It contains all the settings for your pipelines! We accidentally deleted before and we have to restore and re-create several missing pipelines
• More straight forward use of API and allows filtering e.g., pull all pipelines triggered after this date

Incentivized