Jenkins Reviews

I mainly use Jenkins to create automatic triggers for pushing code.

Jenkins' most valuable feature is Pipeline.

Jenkins takes a long time to create archive files.

Jenkins' stability is good, and we haven't had any issues with downtime.

Jenkins is scalable in the sense that we can develop as many jobs as necessary. 

Jenkins' technical support team is small but helpful.

The initial setup isn't very complex, though it may take some time to create end scripts because it lies in the backend and needs to work during free integration time.

We used a uDeploy IBM product and team.

I would rate Jenkins eight out of ten.

We have multiple job templates available. You just need to find the best template for your needs. If you just want to do a Maven build, there will be a more suitable template there. For something else, if you just have one rebuild and you want to deploy it from the server, there will be some other job template available. We have multiple job templates, so we need to configure according to that template and then it's okay.

The solution is deployed on-premises. About 15% of my organization is using this solution. It's basically used by the DevOps engineers. Not all the developers use it.

With Jenkins, the pipeline will take your code from any versioning system like GitHub or Bitbucket. All the security scans can happen in one go and then all the tests also get run. You can just build one container in it and deploy it.

For this solution to be a 10, it has to be a lot more stable. Maybe the public version of Jenkins is stable, but in our case it's not stable. There is a knowledge record, but you still need to figure out the way to configure it initially. It has to be easier. There should be some indication that an error is not caused by Jenkins.

I have been using this solution for a year and a half.

Because we are using in-house tools, it's a little bit unstable.

It's very scalable.

We haven't needed to call support. If we have any issues, we contact HSBC's support team or the one who created the template.

Initial setup is difficult. From start to finish, deployment takes an hour and a half.

We are using in-house tools.

Jenkins is open-source.

I would rate this solution 6 out of 10. 

I have less knowledge of the raw Jenkins, but Jenkins is doing almost all the stuff that I want it to do, but it's not a 10 because of the difficulties to configure it, to make it work, to do end-to-end, and then the stability.

You should first find out all the requirements that Jenkins is doing. You need to find out if you have any coding issue or if Jenkins has any issue. Now I train people to use it, and normally these are the issues that I find. There are many occasions where there is an issue with code but it's not always that Jenkins is wrong; sometimes it's the code that is breaking.

I can install Jenkins for integration from multiple developers and automate application delivery, staging, and production environments.

Jenkins is very useful. I can install Jenkins for integration from multiple developers and automate application delivery, staging, and production environments. It's very easy.

I do not have any notes for improvement.

The scalability of Jenkins is good.

I never have had to contact their support team for any reason.

I also considered using CodeDeploy or Jenkins.

I would give Jenkins a rating of nine on a scale from one to ten.

We used Jenkins for integration purposes, primarily for integrating with version control systems like Git and build tools such as Maven. Later, there were plans to use it in Docker deployment for Docker containers. 

I configured environments for non-production, production, and development in the pipeline. 

I also used Jenkins for a Bluegreen deployment strategy, quality assurance with SonarQube, and artifact storage in JFrog Artifactory.

In our previous company, Jenkins was used for complete automation of build and deployment in a project. From part of automation and customization, I was involved in the project.

The most valuable feature of Jenkins is the plugins available. You name any tool, and there is a plugin available for it in Jenkins. 

Also, the ability to customize these plugins is valuable. Its user-friendliness stands out, especially in its user interface which allows easy installation and configuration.

Jenkins could improve in areas related to Kubernetes and Docker container integration, like machine allocation of nodes and Marshaling integration improvements. Making these aspects more robust would be beneficial.

I have been using Jenkins for around five years now.

Jenkins is stable. Any tool can have latency of a few seconds, but I would rate Jenkins four and a half out of five for its stability.

Jenkins is not as scalable compared to container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. While it can be configured at the server end, the other solutions offer more robust automation and scalability.

My team handles technical support for Jenkins when necessary. However, since I moved into AI and machine learning projects, I haven't been closely involved with technical support issues.

Positive

The initial setup of Jenkins is very straightforward and not difficult.

By installing Jenkins in a master-slave environment, there is significant cost saving, making it a cost-effective tool compared to other CI tools.

I do not have extensive knowledge on the pricing or licensing aspect as I used Jenkins for free at the local machine level. However, it is generally regarded as cost-effective.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We're using Jenkins for projects. We just need to run Jenkins pipelines and stuff.

We use iPlus for web application testing automation. Multiple people can work on the same piece of code. Once we push the code to the Git repositories, by default, we need to check if it's working and if the code passes the tests. 

If any tests fail, we need to verify the logs in Jenkins. So, those are the main things we do with Jenkins.

Pipelines are the most valuable feature. We mostly work on pipelines; it's only because we have to verify the nightly build sign to see whether it is correctly done or not. So, for that kind of function, we usually work on the technical side.

Performance-wise. This needs to be improved. Not only performance-wise, some functionality or some features can be added to Jenkins. 

Suppose we used to get a notification for part or field test cases. So that can also be improved on the technical side. We can get a notification through email or Slack channel or Teams channel. So that kind of notification also, they can also be improved on the technical side. 

I have been using Jenkins for six to eight months. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. I didn't face any crashes. It is hundred percent stable. 

I would rate the scalability a nine out of ten. We have multiple vendors, so we care. We are also one of the vendors for this project. 

So in our project, we are using almost 20 to 25 members using Jenkins.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.

Jenkins is very user-friendly.  

The time taken for deployment depends on the performance of the engine. Sometimes, it may be slow. Usually, we won't face a performance issue. So, within a fraction of a second or within a fraction of a minute, the deployment can be done.

The deployment depends upon the code. If it is a small piece of code or it's a large piece of code. So it depends on the code.

We have a separate DevOps team for maintenance and other tasks.

This is not open source. It's price-based, for example, premium-based.  

Stability-wise, reliability-wise, and performance-wise, it is a good tool. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use Jenkins in CI/CD pipelines. 

Jenkins integrates with multiple tools like Bitbucket and makes life easier. We don't have to write a lot of code since a lot of libraries are available. 

The product should provide more visualization as to how many pipelines are performing and how many builds are happening. It should also integrate with Kubernetes and OpenShift. 

I have been working with the solution for one and a half years. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten. 

Jenkins is pretty scalable and I would rate it an eight out of ten. My company has more than 100 users for it. We use the tool every day. 

We report to our infrastructure team about the plugin issues. 

We wrote our own custom scripts before Jenkins. 

The tool requires maintenance whenever upgrades are available. 

We use the tool's open-source version which is free. There is an enterprise version which is expensive but comes with better support. 

I would rate Jenkins a nine out of ten. 

We use Jenkins for the continuous integration of our jobs and products. We do have a couple of jobs that were created through Jenkins, and it's logical to start like that, as it requires the Java framework to run on Jenkins. We have the developer code; we begin with the power and the PSQL. 

I like the business logs. It's a very useful tool. Client-server communication is also very fast.

It would be better if there were an option to remove its Java dependency. This would make it more compatible with other software, and it could be much better. At present, we have to depend on Java whenever we want to deploy agents.

I have been using Jenkins for about two years.

Jenkins is a stable product.

Jenkins is a scalable product. 

The initial setup is straightforward.

I would tell potential users that Jenkins is a very good tool, which I highly recommend. It's very helpful for the continuous integration of any products. For example, if you want to dial up some things on production and want to go live, we can continuously integrate them. We can put it onto the report starting from the no-code and the subsequent environment and letters. So, Jenkins is very highly recommended.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Jenkins a ten.

We are using Jenkins to automate the compilation and check the implementation from scripts for validation and testing. It's a useful tool for any developer.

If the code works fine in the company's development environment, it doesn't mean that it will be okay for other platforms. We're using Jenkins to test the server in platforms. It's very helpful.

Jenkins has improved our organization by allowing us to use automatic testing to cover all the various levels of software, which includes software embedded into hardware. It has been very difficult to be able to run tests in embedded software in the past.

The most valuable features of Jenkins are the integration of automatic scripts for testing and the user's ability to use any script.

Jenkins is not an easy solution to use and the configuration is not simple. They can improve the solution by adding a graphical interface that is more user-friendly.

I have been using Jenkins for approximately one year.

The stability of Jenkins is good.

Jenkins is scalable.

We have five people that are using this solution in my company.

I have not used the support from Jenkins.

I did not use a solution other than Jenkins.

Jenkins is complex to implement.

The implementation of the solution was done in-house. We use two or three people for the deployment.

The solution has had good value for the money we spent.

My advice to others is this is a tool that will help save time have good coverage for the validation environment and test more hardware capabilities. For example, it can handle an embedded system and it can run any type of script.

I rate Jenkins a nine out of ten.

We use Jenkins to remove human error when completing multiple deployments. 

The most valuable aspect of this solution is that there are multiple features. We can abstract certain variables and then build our deployment routine while being able to do some abstraction onto the SSH connections. 

We can access a history of the different deployments so that we know whenever we have an issue. Problems are well documented so we can actually go back into your deployment history when necessary.

This solution could be improved by removing the storage of unnecessary data such as the history of test deployments that were unsuccessful. 

In a future release, we would like to have access to more third party plugins and would like to integrate with tools like Kubernetes.

We have been using this solution since 2014. 

This is generally a stable solution. Sometimes we have experienced some issues but they have been minor. 

We have previously used an FTP server and we would copy and paste the files manually. I still prefer to use Bash scripts directly and deploy using SSH, or there are situations where we will not use an application because it would be overkill for such a simple deployment. We continue to use alternatives alongside Jenkins because sometimes it is pointless to build an entire Jenkins job just for deploying a website.

There is a learning curve at the beginning. Jenkins could have setup wizards that could help you start off instead of having to rely on someone, reading a manual or completing an online tutorial.

We've done everything in-house. 

We use the open source solution.

There might be unnecessary overheads if you're trying to use Jenkins for very simple deployments. I would say make sure that you actually need to use Jenkins for specific actions.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We use this solution to build, test, and then deploy new software to the FTP server.

This solution has improved our organization with how much time it saves when coding.

We really appreciate that this solution is plug and play. When coding in the version control system, this product completes the build process automatically.

We would like to see the addition of mobile simulators support to this solution, as part of its open-source offering. We currently have to carry out manual testing for these platforms.

We have worked with this solution for around four years.

We have found the stability of this solution to be good.

Due to the lack of mobile simulators, we have not scaled this solution.

We have not had to contact the technical support team; the official documentation provided has resolved any issues we came across.

We found the initial setup of this solution to be okay. The setup isn't complicated, but there is some step by step documentation provided that will need to be read and followed during the process.

The deployment of the product took one or two days initially, and only took one person to action.

We carried out implementation and deployment of this product using our in-house team.

This is an open-source solution for the basic features. However, if an organization wishes to include specific functionality, outside of the basic package, there are extra costs involved.

We previously trialed an AWS-based product. However, it was complex to use and conflicted with some of our existing software.

We highly recommend this solution for web development. However, for mobile development, it may be better for organizations to consider other options.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.