On Apr 16, 2007, at 3:45 PM, Georges Racinet wrote:
On Apr 16, 2007, at 3:05 PM, Stefane Fermigier wrote:
Hi,
after trying almost every CI software on the market, and almost 6
months running TeamCity (http://teamcity.nuxeo.org/), we have
chosen to switch to Hudson (http://hudson.nuxeo.org/).
Reasons:
- TeamCity is proprietary, and quite expensive (200 $ / seat),
whereas Hudson is free (open source).
Great !
- TeamCity had some annoying bugs.
- Hudson has some cool features:
- Jira integration
- Better Maven integration which will play well with our
forthcoming bug Maven refactoring.
Awesome.
The only major drawback that I can see for Hudson wrt TeamCity is
that the UI is much less slick and it doesn't work as hard
analyzing test failures history.
Slickness I personnally couldn't care less, but that's just my
notion of comfort :-)
Well, it's nice, for instance, when a build is broken, to be able to
see in just 1 click (or just by hovering the mouse on the right
widget) who probably broke the test, etc.
Something really useful that we seem to have gained with Hudson:
console output, in particular logs of test runs, and that's much
more useful than bare stacktraces (which usually just tell you
nothing but which assertion failed).
I have especially in mind the cases of tests that fail only on the
bot. For these, unless you can play directly with the bot's
checkout, using logs is about the only debugging possibility. Or
maybe they were related to TeamCity bugs?
Actually, TeamCity did try pretty hard to parse the Maven test
("Surefire") reports, and Hudson only provides (seemingly) the main
log output.
S.
--
Stefane Fermigier, CEO, Nuxeo SAS
Open Source Enterprise Content Management (ECM)
Nuxeo 5 EP is out! - Now Java EE based, standards compliant
Web: http://www.nuxeo.com/ - Tel: +33 1 40 33 79 87
_______________________________________________
ECM mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nuxeo.com/mailman/listinfo/ecm
