Jenkins Reviews

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.

We use Jenkins for deploying with GenX and work on the pipeline too. We engage in many activities using both Jenkins and GenX. 

I love Jenkins. I like that you work on anything, and you make anything. Jenkins is very important for my team. I am satisfied with the product.

Jenkins can be improved, but it's difficult for me to explain. The initial setup could be more straightforward. If you connect Jenkins with bookings and lockouts, it can be challenging.

I have been using Jenkins for three years.

Jenkins is a stable product.

Jenkins is a scalable solution. We have ten people using this product right now.

Technical support was very good.

On a scale from one to five, I would give technical support a five.

Positive

The initial setup depends on the project and related activities.

I have implemented this solution myself, and I have also used a consultant on other occasions.

Jenkins is not expensive and reasonably priced.

I would recommend Jenkins to potential users. You can use Jenkins with other products and make anything you like. 

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

We use this product as an open-source CI/CD. It allows integration, building pipelines, and even linking them to Azure or AWS platforms. It is an open-source tool. However, I wouldn't call it a public cloud. I would refer to it as an open-source tool for continuous integration and deployment. It can be integrated across every platform.

Our primary use case for this solution is creating pipelines for some projects we work on. Additionally, we use it to build pipelines and provide them with commands. For example, if we want to make a Docker image or send the deployments to Azure then we can integrate them into the Jenkins app service instead of Azure DevOps.

The user interface could definitely be improved, and I rate it close to zero. It isn't very good, and I am sure why it has not been worked on. The user interface could definitely be improved.

We have been using this solution for approximately a year and a half and are currently using the latest version.

The solution is stable but it is slow. It is a free service so I can't complain about the time it takes.

The solution is scalable and concurrent users have access to the platform. Currently, only a few people in our company are using this product.

I have not contacted customer service and  support.

The initial setup was difficult. It is not easy to comprehend, and I recommend having a hands-on tutor or experience for you to be able to use it effectively. Additionally, the documentation is not helpful, as it is not user-friendly. I am unsure if this is because it is an open-source product, but it can definitely be improved.

It took approximately two hours to set up from scratch. In order to create the Docker image dependencies that need to be integrated need to be checked. The required keys also need to be identified because some SSH keys might be needed.

We chose this solution because it is in line with the budget and customer preferences. 

I rate this product a four out of ten. I would advise people using this product for the first time to review the provided documentation and watch some YouTube videos on the setup process while trying to understand the platform itself. The documentation is essential as it allows for a better explanation of some features and YouTube assists with troubleshooting. The product is affordable, but the user interface needs to be improved.