Hudson vs Continuum
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.