AWS CodeBuild vs GitHub Actions comparison

"One of the main features I value in CodeBuild compared to previous experiences, like using Jenkins, is its ability to handle tasks automatically with AWS, requiring only proper setup of the check file."

"The most important thing is that it's self-contained in an AWS account, and it's all linked to the customer's AWS account."

"The solution provides good integrations."

"The integration is a good feature."

"The tool is used to build and test code. I find its biggest advantages are elasticity and reliability. We can easily assign as many computing resources as needed to build our code, which is much simpler than traditional methods that require server upgrades. It's a serverless tool, so it's very flexible and elastic."

"The initial setup of CodeBuild is easy."

"The integration is a good feature."

"A valuable feature is the support for third-party repositories such as Bitbucket, GitLab, or GitHub."

"It is user-friendly, with clear and organized processes, making it easy to navigate and work with."

"GitHub Actions helps automate the deployment process, eliminating manual copying and testing, which saves time and minimizes errors."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a good product that offers stability and performance."

"The main benefit is collaboration. It allows us to easily collaborate with other developers, regardless of location. For example, we can collaborate with both our African and German colleagues seamlessly. It's platform-agnostic, so it is flexible and not tied to any OS, so we can work on Linux, Windows, web, and even Oracle applications. It's flexible, reliable, and overall an excellent tool for our needs."

"It offers numerous built-in features for pipeline management, release management, and even work item tracking on boards, which makes it a versatile tool that seamlessly integrates with hardware and facilitates optimization."

"The level of automation achievable is really good. So, the custom workflow creation and Marketplace Actions improved our project's efficiency."

"GitHub Actions is valuable for its ease of use and integration."

"It is easy to use, especially if you are accustomed to using GitHub."

"One of the main challenges is that if the environment is not set up properly, it will result in issues such as image errors."

"There have been times when CodeBuild has shown some instability, like bugs or breakdowns."

"The deployment fails sometimes."

"While working on building images for multiple applications within a single script, I encountered an issue where looping functionality was not supported as expected."

"The front-end interface and the management are somewhat challenging, and there's a lot of space for improvement."

"They can further improve the integration of the Bitbucket for CodeBuild."

"There is no persistent storage or preservation of workspace between the builds."

"For improvement, I'd suggest more build instance-type options. There's a big jump from 15 gigabytes of RAM to 150, and I'd like something in between as the larger option is too expensive for our needs."

"Switching between hosted and self-hosted agents can be a bit complex, as self-hosted agents need to be provisioned in platforms like Azure or AWS."

"We can leverage this database tool to manage everything within our environment and data burners, allowing for customization and execution. An additional advantage is the capability to modify aspects like file size, making processes more efficient and faster across the pipelines. Regarding improvements or implementations, I believe there should be enhancements made to the deployment tool. It should be integrated as part of the solution. Infrastructure-wise, we already have tools like GitHub and RobSpot, and data enables us to automate various processes, which is quite beneficial. As for further enhancements, I'm uncertain. I've shared everything I know. However, if there's something specific you'd like to see in future releases, a feature that may not exist yet but would be desirable, I can't provide any input on that matter."

"There is a part that detects outdated libraries. If that feature could be more intuitive and informative, that would be nice."

"The only issue I have faced is with authorization, particularly when configuring the GitHub token correctly."

"The minor drawback of GitHub Actions is the management of the dashboard and pipeline runs, which needs improvement. The dashboard for running pipelines could be better."

"Sometimes it is quite complex to commit code from our local system to the GitHub repository; creating a folder in GitHub can be tedious."

"The UI could be better."

"The reporting capabilities are somewhat limited."

"We pay a monthly licensing fee."

"AWS CodeBuild is free. We only pay for our code's compute resources during the build process. For example, if our code takes ten minutes to build, we only pay for those ten minutes of computing time. CodeDeploy and CodePipeline are free because they're serverless and don't require computing resources. CodeCommit has minimal costs for storing code."

"Despite the cost, it is worth the investment."

"The tool's price is okay and reasonable."

"It's low-priced. Not high, but definitely low."

"The product is slightly more expensive than some alternatives."

"Regarding cost, as an enterprise, we negotiate our license and expenses, so I can't provide a specific rating for that."

"Price-wise, GitHub Actions is okay. If I want to use the product's advanced features, then I need to pay the licensing charges for the solution."

"The cost for GitHub Actions may be around $45 dollars per user."

"For our basic usage, we didn't have to pay."

"It is free and open platform, so I would rate it 1 out of 10."