RubyGems.org vs. Sonatype Platform

RubyGems is a great packaging library primarily because of its verbose logging information and easy to navigate system architecture. We've dealt with artifactory systems in the past for Java and JavaScript, and RubyGems just makes it a lot easier to handle the packaging and deployment of our reusable libraries. We've noticed in the past that there are times where (if all 200+ teams) are releasing at a similar time that publishing the gems can lag, but that's fairly rare.

Incentivized

- Guidance on remediation is very good - Vulnerability detection is very good - Support is very good - Ability to ask PMs/POs open questions at Office Hours every month is very good - Support for languages is lacking (TIOBE Index Top20) - Some features are un-neededly hidden and make the usage more complex then it needs to be

• Seemless packaging
• Well documented
• Verbose error logs
• Active community support
• Quick security fixes/releases

Incentivized

• Nexus firewall is a great feature enabled for all our proxy repositories which are used to download the third-party opensource packages.
• Nexus IQ is integrated with build stage to analyze the component against evaluation policy. This helps to figure out the application security standards.
• Nexus IQ is also having a feature to scan container images before it uploads to our private repository. This is great feature for container platforms.

• Lack of solid Windows support.
• Not great performance if lots of people release at the same time.

Incentivized

• Support on the end of life lifecycle of known open source components that are going end of life, or already went end of life
• Support for emerging infrastructure as code frameworks
• Support for native/ default retention, archiving and clean up policies for hosted repositories

Sonatype supports more than 200 dev(s). It proves with the repository to store the artifacts. Allows for governance of open source software used by the different teams. It is used by security teams to scan for vulnerabilities in software(s) and in the deployed containers. It helps ensure code quality.

Incentivized

Overall experience is great with the Platform; however, I see some opportunity with upgrading the platform as it is missing with data of historical scans to allow reviewer to get view of trend how the application/product development team is considering fixing the issues.

Incentivized

Extremely good

Sonatype products are great value as I said but a few areas like how products use underlying resources in order to make it further lightweight, is something I would like them to consider.

RubyGems has strong community support and finding issues to errors is as simple as searching for the error message you're receiving (but usually the error is clear enough without having to bother with that). Honestly, the framework is simple enough that support isn't needed much, but it has been helpful to us in the past when we have needed it.

Incentivized

Monthly touchpoints with Sinisa has been very valuable.

Incentivized

easy to implement and performing the scans via automations as well

Incentivized

RubyGems is easier to use and to troubleshoot issues overall. Sometimes when troubleshooting in other systems errors are masked and it takes a trained eye or a lot of time searching through Google trying to find out what it really means. RubyGems is very verbose and allows for quick troubleshooting of any deployment problems.

Incentivized

Out of other products we evaluated before choosing Sonatype, the later looked far more user friendly, easy to understand and work with. This was key for us, as the tool needs to be used by many engineers that don't have security as their main focus. Having a tool that is easy to understand and work with, makes the process of evaluating open source dependencies much easier and appealing for developers.

Incentivized

Great value for money

Everything is very good except a little concern regarding large scale docker usage.

Very good

• Quick package hosting.
• Faster deployment process.
• Less troubleshooting needed during deployment.

Incentivized

• Sonatype's centralized management of artifacts have made it very easy for developers to share code in an efficient manner.
• Sonatype's low false positive rate has made it easier to convince developers to remediate vulnerabilities
• Sonatype's archaic architecture has made it more expensive to manage than it could be.