Hudson vs Continuum
I’ve installed Continuum to compare to Hudson.
As Hudson, you just uncompress the archive wher you want (for a standalone deployment), run and it works. Then you create your project, choose your build configuration (there’s default configuration for ant, maven 1 and 2, and console).
Just a think to now : you have to specify your SCM url in the maven format (even if you use ant) : for subversion, it will look like <code> scm:svn:https://host:8443/svn/Repository/trunk </code>, otherwise you’ll have a message like Provider message: No such provider: ‘s’.
First impressions testing it, compared to Hudson : at first sight, I prefer the dashboard of Hudson, which have a better view of the past builds with a meteo indicator computed on past 5 builds.This give you a view of the stability of the builds.
Continuum is organized ny projects groups, So you have a first view on the group with counters on successful project, with a counter (a project counts for one).
When you click on a group you then have a view on the projects of the group :
There’s a release button on each group in the main view, and on each project in a group view. You’ll find the documentation on the release functionality on Continuum website. I should try this soon. For the moment, I’ve not been able to get the prepare options to continue the process.
I find the navigation in Hudson more intutuive, but it’s quick to findhow to navigate in Hudson. The organisation of project in groups should also be useful in a large organisation, matching groups of project with the team’s organisation.
I’ll also try integration with Jira later.
About this entry
You’re currently reading “Hudson vs Continuum,” an entry on Java Thoughts
- Published:
- April 23, 2009 / 8:10 am
- Category:
- continuous integration
- Tags:
- continuous integration, continuum, hudson
No comments yet
Jump to comment form | comment rss [?] | trackback uri [?]