Sonatype Nexus Repository Reviews

I have been working with Sonatype Nexus Repository for more than five years to manage different artifacts in my project.

Sonatype Nexus Repository is used to maintain different private repositories. We create different private hosted repositories wherein we can maintain our artifacts including Java JAR files or WAR files. We create Docker repositories to maintain our Docker images. Helm repositories are created to manage our Helm charts. Additionally, we create Python repositories, pip repositories for managing Python packages, NuGet repositories for managing .NET artifacts, and NPM repositories for managing Node packages. We also use Sonatype Nexus Repository for creating proxy repositories to cache artifacts, so once any particular machine accesses a public artifact from maven.com or npmjs, those artifacts are cached inside Sonatype Nexus Repository, and then those artifacts are served to the different project machines.

These are the primary use cases to manage all the artifacts across different projects. We mainly create hosted repositories and proxy repositories. We integrate these repositories with different CI/CD pipeline tools, for example, Jenkins, and we also integrate them with build tools like Maven. Using the build tool lifecycle phases, we deploy the artifacts to the artifactories. Additionally, we create different users on Sonatype Nexus Repository and assign them specific roles according to the user and job requirements. By implementing RBAC or Role-Based Access Control, we control access to our Sonatype Nexus Repository repositories. We also ensure to set up cleanup policies so that our Sonatype Nexus Repository server does not run out of disk space.

The integration with CI/CD tools is a standout feature for me in daily work. I also appreciate artifact management because compared to other artifact repositories like Jfrog, I find Sonatype Nexus Repository quite user-friendly in terms of its integration with different CI/CD tools and the different artifact management features. The security features are also quite useful; for example, you can install your SSL certificates to secure your Sonatype Nexus Repository. Additionally, the documentation of Sonatype Nexus Repository is quite comprehensive and very easy to follow. I find all the features quite user-friendly in Sonatype Nexus Repository.

Sonatype Nexus Repository has positively impacted our organization by configuring these proxy repositories, which have significantly reduced artifact management time. We have observed more than 50 percent time efficiency. Sonatype Nexus Repository allows us to maintain different hosted repositories within the company's network, which we would otherwise have to maintain over the internet. The internet push and pull for artifacts usually takes a lot of time, and our organization policies often do not allow accessing the internet for these kinds of artifacts due to security reasons. Sonatype Nexus Repository has significantly saved us efforts as well as time. We take a very good amount of control over our own repository management, which is something we really appreciate about Sonatype Nexus Repository.

I would like to explore the AI features in Sonatype Nexus Repository, such as the Sonatype MCP servers for automating the creation of repositories and user management. I have gone through some of the documents, but I have not explored this area much. I would be more interested in exploring these areas of Sonatype Nexus Repository now.

AI capabilities are an area for improvement, but I have not had the chance to work much with its AI features yet. Additionally, I think Sonatype Nexus Repository's free version could use more features. There are two versions of Sonatype Nexus Repository: a paid version and a free version. If the free version had more features, it could help people conduct effective proofs of concept, as the limited features often impact decision-making when evaluating tools against real-time use cases. If the free version includes more features while maintaining some usage limitations, it would greatly aid others in effectively validating Sonatype Nexus Repository for their actual needs.

If Sonatype Nexus Repository focuses more on integrating AI features to make usage more efficient, that would be great. User management and artifact management are all fine, but integrating AI capabilities effectively is something I would like to see in upcoming versions of Sonatype Nexus Repository.

I have been working in my current field for more than 10 years.

Sonatype Nexus Repository is very stable, and I have not experienced any issues with downtime or reliability.

Sonatype Nexus Repository is scalable. We have installed the repository inside Docker containers, and we have scaled those Docker repositories up easily without any issues.

We did not get a chance to interact directly with Sonatype's support team because the documentation is so well laid out that we managed to resolve any issues by referring to it. I would really appreciate the documentation team of Sonatype Nexus Repository for their excellent work.

We previously used Jfrog, but we switched to Sonatype Nexus Repository due to its user-friendliness and being feature-rich. These are the main reasons, as Sonatype Nexus Repository is straightforward to set up, user-friendly, and more feature-rich.

The setup cost for Sonatype Nexus Repository is not much, and it is easy to follow. The licensing is also reasonable, and we have no complaints regarding the costs associated with Sonatype Nexus Repository. We are quite satisfied with it.

We have seen a return on investment by saving significant time, more than 50 percent of our build and deploy pipeline time, leading to a clear ROI. Additionally, we save money because we transitioned from maintaining a lot of private repositories over public artifactories to Sonatype Nexus Repository. The efficiency and saved time are substantial. We have saved more than 50 percent of our time and money by shifting all artifact management to Sonatype Nexus Repository.

The setup cost for Sonatype Nexus Repository is not much, and it is easy to follow. The licensing is also reasonable, and we have no complaints regarding the costs associated with Sonatype Nexus Repository. We are quite satisfied with it.

To be very honest, we did not evaluate other options before choosing Sonatype Nexus Repository. We were convinced that it would be the best solution to replace Jfrog, so we went ahead with it without looking into anything else.

I would give eight out of ten for Sonatype Nexus Repository. I chose eight out of ten because it is feature-rich, and you can create all kinds of repositories. The installation process is also very easy, and the documentation is comprehensive and user-friendly. The overall user-friendliness of all features, from user management to artifact creation, is something I appreciate, which led to my rating of eight.

I haven't explored the AI features of Sonatype Nexus Repository much, but I have heard about some AI capabilities around governance and security. I have not worked on these features, so I cannot comment on them currently. Once I try these features and implement them in my project, I would be able to provide feedback.

Regarding accuracy and reliability, I believe there should be a focus on ensuring accuracy while minimizing any potential hallucination. I would like to see AI capabilities particularly around user management and artifact factory management, expecting around 85 to 95 percent accuracy and reliability from the AI capabilities of Sonatype Nexus Repository.

I would definitely recommend Sonatype Nexus Repository as it is a stable and user-friendly product. I believe that other teams can also achieve similar returns on investment as we have after implementing Sonatype Nexus Repository.

We are quite happy with Sonatype Nexus Repository, and I hope the Sonatype team will continue to serve us as they have for many years. My overall rating for this product is eight out of ten.

I use Sonatype Nexus Repository for downloading packages. My application was Java-based and Spring Boot-based, so I was downloading packages from Sonatype Nexus Repository and uploading the WAR file that was built during the CI process to Sonatype Nexus Repository.

In my CI/CD process, there was a Sonatype Nexus Repository upload stage that was executed after completing stages such as build, Sonar scan, Sonatype Nexus IQ scan, and testing. Once all these stages were completed and the WAR file was built, the Sonatype Nexus Repository upload stage would upload the WAR file of my Java application to Sonatype Nexus Repository. In the deployment stage, I would download those WAR files to the servers.

Sonatype Nexus Repository was very helpful because currently, there are around 20 to 30 microservices in our application and my client was a big network provider in the UK with many projects. They used Sonatype Nexus Repository to store the JAR and WAR files of all their applications that were being built. This helped with efficiency because before using Sonatype Nexus Repository, everyone was using Jenkins and storing the JAR and WAR files on their local server where Jenkins was running. After implementing Sonatype Nexus Repository, we could have JAR and WAR files and all packages in a central place where they could be stored for a longer time. Additionally, files could not be accidentally deleted, and I could maintain different versions of the JAR and WAR files by tagging them with different names.

For version management in Sonatype Nexus Repository, I could have multiple versions of the same WAR file. For example, if an application was being built during the CI process, I could tag it with 'A-1' and upload it to Sonatype Nexus Repository. During another stage, I could upload it as 'A-2'. In this way, I could manage versioning and it helped with long-term storage. I could use the same JAR file after six to seven months, and if I had not deleted that WAR file and had not used any lifecycle policy, I could still access it.

The user interface of Sonatype Nexus Repository was fine and not too bad overall. However, some aspects of the user interface were not ideal because if a JAR or WAR file was uploaded, I might find it difficult to delete that particular JAR or WAR file, as it was somewhat embedded deep within the UI and required significant navigation to delete the WAR file. This was the UI problem I experienced. Otherwise, I have not encountered any other problems with the UI.

I was experiencing some network connection issues with Sonatype Nexus Repository because of high RAM usage. However, I was not certain whether that was the issue with Sonatype Nexus Repository or internal errors. Otherwise, I have not experienced any other issues with Sonatype Nexus Repository. Overall, it was a very good product.

I used Sonatype Nexus Repository for around 3.5 years.

Everyone was using Jenkins and storing the JAR and WAR files on their local server where Jenkins was running.

Time saved is what I can highlight with Sonatype Nexus Repository. There was no need for additional employees because that could be managed by a CI/CD pipeline. Typically, one or two people are needed for Sonatype Nexus Repository management.

Money saved is not significant because a license needs to be purchased. However, if choosing the free license, some money can be saved with Sonatype Nexus Repository.

Sonatype Nexus Repository is good for storing packages such as JAR and WAR files. I have not used it for other packages such as Python or other programming languages. However, for Java and Spring Boot JAR and WAR files, there is flexibility in using Sonatype Nexus Repository. It can also use a small amount of storage if there is a small company. If there is a big company, NFS can be used and Sonatype Nexus Repository can also be installed on-premises or on the AWS side. Both paid and free versions of Sonatype Nexus Repository are available.

I used Amazon Web Services for AWS deployment purposes.

I am not certain about the pricing and licensing details because that was not handled by me. My overall review rating for Sonatype Nexus Repository is 7.5 out of 10.

My main use case for Sonatype Nexus Repository was as the repository for storing internally developed artifacts. As a developer while building applications, I pulled dependencies from Sonatype Nexus Repository. Dependencies such as Log4j, Spring Boot, and any other dependencies used in our applications would be pulled from Sonatype Nexus Repository.

As a big organization, Sonatype Nexus Repository positively impacted us by providing a centralized repository for storing all internally developed artifacts and third-party artifacts. Apart from speed and productivity, Sonatype Nexus Repository helped with security, which was possibly the main reason or outcome.

When I was using Sonatype Nexus Repository, I found the storage and pulling of dependencies to be really fast, and it was definitely a reliable tool.

Sonatype Nexus Repository was supposed to be one single storage area for internally developed artifacts. Developers had to pull their dependencies from Sonatype Nexus Repository. Since internally developed artifacts were from Sonatype Nexus Repository, we ensured that only vetted and approved artifacts were being pulled by all developers across the enterprise.

Based on what we had used at that time, I was not sure whether what we had was the full version of Sonatype Nexus Repository, but what we had at that point in time was primarily focused on pulling dependencies. I know Sonatype Nexus Repository now has firewall capabilities and scanning capabilities as well, scanning dependencies for vulnerabilities. At that point in time, it was only the pulling and storage of dependencies.

At that point in time, I was not exposed to all the features that Sonatype Nexus Repository offers today. The firewall feature, which is Nexus Firewall, and overall software supply chain security features that are now there with Sonatype Nexus Repository were not available back then. I believe Sonatype Nexus Repository has most of these features now.

I used Sonatype Nexus Repository for more than two years.

Sonatype Nexus Repository is stable.

Sonatype Nexus Repository was scalable.

One thing at that point in time was that Sonatype Nexus Repository was on-premises, so it did not require authentication. I am not sure how the SaaS model works right now, and I hope authentication and authorization using keyless authentication or workload identity federation is a part of Sonatype Nexus Repository today.

My advice to others looking into using Sonatype Nexus Repository is that if it is an enterprise as big as mine, definitely ensure that enterprise support is covered because a good volume of artifacts is going to be stored in the tool, so enterprise support is definitely recommended.

We use Sonatype Nexus Repository for our internal repository, for image caching, registry caching, and our custom registry. Sonatype Nexus Repository's repository function is definitely the most valuable feature I have found.

I did not test it extensively versus other options, but I can tell you that Sonatype Nexus Repository works in a stable manner. It allows us to have geographical disaster recovery, which was one feature that we needed.

We are using Sonatype Nexus Repository's granular access controls, and we needed to use them because we have several teams. Therefore, it is essential for us, and it is one of the features that we are using by design.

It is a requirement for managing Maven, npm, or Docker, so without it, we cannot do it. You need to have a product—this one or another—you need to have one.

Sonatype Nexus Repository's repository function is definitely the most valuable feature I have found.

I did not test it extensively versus other options, but I can tell you that Sonatype Nexus Repository works in a stable manner. It allows us to have geographical disaster recovery, which was one feature that we needed.

We are using Sonatype Nexus Repository's granular access controls, and we needed to use them because we have several teams. Therefore, it is essential for us, and it is one of the features that we are using by design.

I think what can be eventually improved is to introduce as a standard the additional security features that Sonatype Nexus Repository offers, which are basically plugins for the repository itself.

I have been using Sonatype Nexus Repository for 10 years.

I rate how stable and reliable Sonatype Nexus Repository is at a 10. We have had zero issues since we installed it, so it is wonderful.

We have had zero issues with Sonatype Nexus Repository, so I do not see any reason for it not to receive a 10 based on my entire experience with it.

I rate how scalable Sonatype Nexus Repository is at a 10 out of 10.

I often communicate with Sonatype's technical support and customer service. They are very good. I was mainly in touch with the pre-sales team, but they were always able to adjust to the needs that we had. They are absolutely excellent.

Positive

We used Sonatype Nexus Repository in the open-source version, which had some limitations.

I participated in the initial setup process of Sonatype Nexus Repository. It was very smooth because the pre-sales team of Sonatype did a very nice job, so it was easy to implement.

I used help from the vendor.

I would say that considering the environment and everything, for one person, I managed to save approximately one hour a month with Sonatype Nexus Repository. However, you need to scale this for the number of people that you have in the company. The bigger your organization is, the more benefit you get.

It is an adequate price for the features that you get.

We did not use the repository health check feature.

I have been working with Sonatype Nexus Repository since 2020, and I have continued working with it since 2022. Moving to the pro version of Sonatype Nexus Repository reduced our time to accomplish what we needed to some extent. My main focus is on the Geo-DR part because it is complex and not commonly offered. Most products handle it using external infrastructure, but Sonatype does not. It is self-contained and really helpful in order to move us to where we need to be.

I'm using the Sonatype Nexus Repository to store the artifact files, specifically the build files from my company. The project builds into many binary files and images, so I store all of that on Sonatype Nexus Repository. We have retention days for all artifacts. Whenever the server needs to get the binary file, it requests it from the Sonatype Nexus Repository and takes the correct file for deployment. Instead of ECR, AWS has something called ECR and some other services to store binary files, but the Sonatype Nexus Repository open-source is sufficient without any cost.

The Sonatype Nexus Repository is running on AWS Cloud, on EKS as a service. The current functions fit our corporation, and we're presently using it free without the need for a license. However, we plan to buy a license in the future.

Hosting, proxying, and grouping repositories in Sonatype Nexus Repository have no impact on development process time and are perceived as very fast. It simplifies version management by storing a consistent library version, avoiding conflicts.

User policies and granular access control, though not integrated with LDAP or Azure Entra, work well for specific action configurations.

We installed the Sonatype Nexus Repository using an open-source Helm chart but need to test it for credential-less AWS integration. We may seek support in the future.

One of the challenging aspects of the Sonatype Nexus Repository is understanding its procedures, as job scheduling is not fully explained in documentation and logs are cumbersome and unhelpful for issues such as troubleshooting push file errors.

Our team pushes libraries to the Sonatype Nexus Repository to store them with fixed versions. Before using Sonatype Nexus Repository, we pulled from external sources, which sometimes caused issues with library versions changing and breaking code.

One of the notable features of Sonatype Nexus Repository is the detailed file information provided for stored files, including SHA and checksums.

I rate the Sonatype Nexus Repository 9.5 out of 10.

Our main use case for Sonatype Nexus Repository is managing artifacts and having them in a central repository that is accessible for all our software engineers on the team. In our day-to-day activities, we use Sonatype Nexus Repository for managing artifacts, and it gives us a centralized repository instead of pulling from public Maven NPM registries every time. Our organization has internal libraries hosted on Sonatype, so software engineers pull these libraries from Sonatype Nexus Repository, which solves the problem of engineers pulling libraries from Maven almost all the time.

One of the features I love about Sonatype Nexus Repository is storing the company's internal artifacts along with version management and release/snapshot separation, where we have separation between release files and snapshot files. There is access control for internal and external artifacts, and combining multiple repositories into one logical endpoint is something I appreciate about Sonatype, along with how Sonatype Nexus Repository handles large artifact stores and disk space optimization.

Role-based access in Sonatype Nexus Repository allows us to control who can read, write, or deploy artifacts. Developers can read artifacts and deploy snapshots, while CI/CD systems have specific credentials for automated deploys, and administrators have full access for maintenance. Contractors and interns have limited read-only access if needed, which helps prevent unauthorized changes, as only authorized people can push production releases. Sonatype Nexus Repository logs who deployed what and when, which is crucial for compliance.

In our team, the development team can push snapshots and pull any artifact for development. The release manager can promote snapshots to releases, and the CI/CD pipeline setup has a special service account with limited permissions to only pull artifacts. New interns have read-only access until they are fully onboarded, and external partners can only access specific repositories that we share.

Before using Sonatype Nexus Repository, developers waited for Maven Central downloads on every build, leading to inconsistent build times depending on internet speed. Builds failed if Maven Central was down or slow, and working offline was almost impossible. When we started using Sonatype Nexus Repository, build times improved by 30 to 40 percent through artifact caching with consistent, predictable build performance. Offline builds became very easy for us because we have cached artifacts locally, which increased team productivity immediately, saving approximately 50 to 150 minutes of developer time daily. This recovery of hundreds of hours allows developers to focus on actual development work instead of waiting for downloads.

Before Sonatype Nexus Repository, different developers had different versions of the same library, leading to the "it works on my machine" syndrome that caused frustrated troubleshooting. With Sonatype Nexus Repository, we now have a single source of truth for all artifacts, ensuring all developers use identical versions and enabling reproducible builds across all machines. This speeds up debugging and reduces versioning inconsistencies, allowing the team to trust that if it works for one person, it works for everyone.

Onboarding also improved significantly, as new developers previously spent hours configuring Maven settings and understanding multiple repository URLs, leading to mistakes in setup and blocked starts. After implementing Sonatype Nexus Repository, new team members are productive in minutes due to a single repository URL to configure in the settings.xml files and documented, foolproof setup. This frees senior developers for actual mentoring and reduces ramp-up time for contractors and interns.

Sonatype Nexus Repository also provided cost optimization since it eliminated the need for local repository caches on each developer's machine, centralizing storage and reducing overall storage by 70 percent, resulting in lower bandwidth usage through shared caching.

In terms of improvement for Sonatype Nexus Repository, the user interface and user experience need attention, as navigation can be confusing for someone who is just starting out. I suggest implementing a search command palette similar to VS Code's, perhaps with functionality similar to Ctrl+K, or modernizing the UI with contemporary design patterns. Introducing dark mode options would also be beneficial.

Regarding performance, bulk operations can be slow, and deleting a thousand or more old artifacts takes a very long time, making the system sluggish during cleanup. There is no way to perform background deletion and cleanup policies cannot be optimally scheduled. I suggest the team implement asynchronous bulk delete operations that can happen behind the scenes, improving background job processing. This ensures cleanup operations do not block normal artifact access, as well as providing granular scheduling for maintenance tasks and progress tracking for long operations.

I have been using Sonatype Nexus Repository for almost two to three years.

On my team, we actually have Sonatype Nexus Repository installed on all engineers' computers locally, and one of the issues we have with that is the initial setup complexity, leading to disk space management issues whenever we onboard a new engineer into the team. Because of these problems, we have to look for a way to solve this problem, which is actually moving from local to remote server deployment, enhancing team collaboration and shared repository, eliminating redundancy with no duplicates on multiple machines, simplifying dependency management across the team, and having a single source of truth for all of our artifacts, resulting in consistent builds across members, reduced bandwidth, easier onboarding of new team members, and better security.

I recall a day when a developer was onboarded, and I had to help with setup. The new engineer needed to configure Maven, open the M2 settings, the M2 folder, the settings.xml files, add repository URLs, authentication credentials, and all of that. In the afternoon when he tried his first build, it failed due to artifact not found, leading him to run back to me in frustration. Eventually, we discovered he was using the wrong repository order in the settings.xml, making me spend another 30 minutes debugging. At the end of the day, after finally getting this new developer's build working, he expressed that the setup was confusing with multiple URLs to remember, making him feel an unease about whether he was doing something wrong, causing frustration.

After improving the onboarding process by moving to Sonatype Nexus Repository, the setup became much smoother and this new developer stated that setup was super simple, requiring just one URL and one command to get everything working, making him productive within the first hour, which was way better than expected.

For others looking into using Sonatype Nexus Repository, I would advise considering how it can streamline their development processes.

Our primary tool is Sonatype Nexus Repository Manager. We use it for NPM, Maven, and Docker repositories. Additionally, we utilize Nexus Firewall for repository governance. Looking ahead, I'm considering implementing Nexus Repository Manager 3 as an alternative. This would help us manage packages from Nexus IQ Server and support various package formats such as NPM, Maven, and Docker.

We rely on Sonatype Nexus Repository Manager as our main tool, employing it for NPM, Maven, and Docker repositories. In addition, Nexus Firewall plays a crucial role in our repository governance. As we plan for the future, I'm exploring the option of incorporating Nexus Repository Manager 3. This move would enhance our ability to manage packages from Nexus IQ Server and cater to different package formats like NPM, Maven, and Docker.

Primarily, the extensive support for a wide range of packages is a crucial factor. The effectiveness of new-age package managers is often determined by the breadth of packages they can handle. In this regard, Nexus Repository Manager 3 stands out for its comprehensive coverage, accommodating a vast array of packages widely utilized across the globe. This inclusivity enables easy access to a diverse range of packages, making it a pivotal aspect of its functionality.     

Particularly concerning OSF-type licenses, while they support a multitude of features, there's room for improvement in the single point transform, especially for grouping. It appears that currently, the grouping functionality is not robust, particularly for Docker images within a group. The support for this aspect seems to be contingent on the license type. For instance, with the Voss license type, there is a noticeable absence of support for this feature. This is an area that could benefit from enhancement in the upcoming updates.

I have been using Sonatype Nexus Repository for five months.

I am, personally, quite satisfied with the stability and would rate it 8 out of 10. 

I would rate the scalability of this solution a four out of ten. The reason being, it's not very scalable, and significant efforts are required to enhance scalability. There are noticeable limitations that need to be addressed for smoother scalability.Currently, there are approximately forty-eight users working with Nexus Repository in our company. As for future plans, I don't foresee a significant increase in the usage of Nexus Repository.

While it's true that there is no explicit support for various license types, the summer type seems to be highly favored and encouraged among users. It holds a prominent position, perhaps earning a rating of seven for its effectiveness and user adoption.

It is easy and I would rate it 8 out of 10.The entire deployment process, including installation, manual testing, and all implementation phases, typically takes around one week but only one person is usually sufficient to handle the entire deployment efficiently.

I can confidently recommend this solution. The main reason is its stability. In comparison to other competitors, especially when I consider alternatives like Project X, Nexus stands out as a stable and reliable choice. This reliability is a key factor that makes me feel comfortable recommending it to other users. Based on its performance, I would rate it 8 out of 10. 

We use Sonatype Nexus Repository as a proxy for external packages for internet users. It also helps us manage internal packages and works as a repository for container images.

The product helped our organization improve runtime efficiency. We do not have to connect third-party vendors while building external packages or storing container-approved images. It allows end-to-end life cycle accessibility.

Sonatype Nexus Repository has a valuable internal scanner feature. It automatically scans external artifacts, such as Fortify SAST, before storing them in the repository.

There could be more add-on features for the product. They should provide automation for adding container images and artifacts in compliance with security requirements.

We have been using Sonatype Nexus Repository for one year.

I rate the product's stability a seven out of ten. Sometimes, there are challenges in mitigating intermittent incidents. There might be factors such as network issues impacting communication.

We have 20,000 to 40,000 end users for the product. It is easy to scale. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten. We use it 24/7.

The technical support team takes time to respond and depends on the nature of the request. We have to keep contacting them. However, the process to create tickets is simple.

Neutral

I have worked on POCs for different products.

The initial setup is simple if you have access to container images. It is a seamless process for upgrading as well. Everything is well documented on the vendor’s official site. They form regular maintenance to comply with organizational requirements. They have a good maintenance process for updating and addressing issues. We have a team of 100 executives working on the current project to maintain components.

I use the open-source version of the product, which is free of cost.

I rate Sonatype Nexus Repository an eight out of ten. I advise others to update the business continuity plan for components regularly, i.e., semi-annually or quarterly. Use container images for the next migration or maintenance update. They should secure the user interface. Additionally, they should ensure a good storage process and plan a retention policy for all attacks.

It's our building background. We use it as a proxy repository to Maven, for example, and we use it to store our own good results and to bring them into production. So it's a turning point for this.

It works well together with the Nexus IQ. We can check our incoming artifacts from third parties with the help of the Nexus Secure server, which correlates with the Nexus support.

And we can provide good results or products to customers where they can download it from there and bring it into production on servers or something like that. So it's everything in this field.

The quality of documentation is good. I can find what I'm looking for every time. Except, there are some mistakes or errors in the backpacks. So, in this case I have to contact support.

It is not as well-suited for managing NPM packages as it is for managing Maven packages.

So, there are potential challenges in seamlessly integrating with non-Maven technologies.

I have been using this for five years. I am using Sonatype Nexus Repository version 3.48.

The product has been stable since the deployment. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

We are not using any scaling mechanisms which are provided with this product. We would just use more CPU, something like that. But it's okay. There's not much need for scalability here. Not so many people are accessing the repository right now. So it works fine for us.

There are over 130 end users using this solution. 

The customer service and support are good because if there are some problems, we can open a ticket there. And usually, we get help within a day at the latest. Often much earlier.

They are good regarding their speed of response, and the staff is very good. 

Positive

The initial setup was not challenging. We've changed from Nexus 2, which we have used earlier. So, this was a migration process, which was just a simple turn-on. Just that system is a step on, but however, it worked fine. So there was no real problem. 

The deployment took around two months. Two to three people were involved in the process.

We have around five administrators for the solution.

The licensing cost is transparent and cheap. Overall, it is a very good price. 

We pay for a license, and the support is connected to it. We regularly communicate with our customer success engineer. And we have the technical support and the documentation. So, there's no extra charge for the support included in the license.

Our company used JFrog. 

I recommend examining your processes to determine if they align with this tool, as its history is heavily concentrated on Maven. If your operations involve Maven, this solution is likely the most suitable. 

As we primarily focus on Java and Maven, I would give this solution a rating of nine out of ten in such cases. 

However, if your emphasis shifts towards NPM products or NuGet, using Nexus is still feasible but may require more effort. The tool is more centered around Maven, making it a bit challenging to seamlessly integrate with NPM. 

In such scenarios, opting for a different product might be more favorable. Nevertheless, if your environment revolves around Java or related technologies, Nexus stands out as a top-notch product in the market.

I have found managing the artifact features very useful.

They could improve the user interface and REST APIs. I found that JFrog has multiple features as compared to Nexus Artifactory. JFrog is more advanced, so it has many good features. The REST API is good. The CLI and the integration with other build tools are quite good in JFrog, so comparatively I found the Nexus has to improve a lot.

I have been using Sonatype Nexus Repository for the past year.

The stability of Sonatype Nexus Repository is very good.

I found that Sonatype Nexus Repository is scalable in multiple cases.

The technical support is good, although I have not had to work with the technical support a lot.

The setup was relatively easy and did not take a long time.

I currently use the open source version and enterprise version with my client. The cost is managed by the client.

I would rate Sonatype Nexus Repository an eight out of ten.