Jenkins Reviews

We primarily use the solution for CI, continuous integration, and as a content server. 

The solution is quite scalable and user-friendly. It's very easy to learn. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

It's stable.

The solution can scale.

It has good documentation to help with troubleshooting. 

The solution needs more support for different Docker setups. Right now, it's a bit complicated. If there were better Docker integration, it would be ideal. Right now, there is no easy plug-in. You really have to explore it a bit more to figure out how to do it. 

We need more licensed product integrations. For example, having a licensed integration with Jira would be great.

It is a bit limited in terms of its vision right now. 

I've been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is stable. Sometimes the host server may be down. However, most of the time, it's stable. 

I'd rate the stability nine out of ten.

It's a pretty scalable solution. We find it easy to expand. 

We're using it for a large application and haven't had any issues. It's a bit close sometimes; however, it doesn't crash at regular intervals. Sometimes there might be some server down or something that might cause an issue.

I'd rate the scalability nine out of ten. 

We have about 300 or more people using the solution. We tend to use the product on a weekly basis. 

It is an open-source solution and has good documentation. 

I've also used Bamboo, which is a bit more user-friendly. It has good integrations and licensing.

The solution offers a very straightforward setup. If you have a little bit of technical knowledge, it shouldn't give you any trouble. I'd rate the ease of setup nine out of ten. 

The solution is open-source. 

We're a partner.

Before using the solution, it is helpful to have some Git or CI/CD experience under your belt. It would help with context when starting to use Jenkins. 

I'd rate the solution 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'm using Jenkins for CI/CD pipelines. We have around 400 dashboards and BI applications that need to be deployed when we make changes and push it all out on GitHub. 

I create webhooks from GitHub to trigger the Jenkins pipeline, which runs a script that I'm writing in Python. This deploys the applications to their respective application servers.

Jenkins allows us to automate deployment, so I no longer have to do it manually. That's the primary use case. The other advantage of Jenkins is that it's open source. It was free for me to download and install. It's a product that's been in use for many years, so I can find a lot of support online for any issues that I may encounter while configuring anything for a given use case.

I like that Jenkins integrates seamlessly with GitHub, and it's able to clone a lot of repositories. There is also a workflow sequence where I can write my script so that it goes through a particular workflow channel and all the scripts run. 

Jenkins offers many environment variables, allowing me to customize it and deploy in various environments without too many changes to the record. It's fairly sophisticated in that sense.

Many of the Jenkins servers I install are on a system in some restricted zone where the server doesn't have internet access. This is problematic because Jenkins requires many plugins to integrate with GitHub or add custom functions, so it would be helpful if the plugins were pre-installed with the product.

Installing them online is easier because I can go ahead and search for the plugins I need. However, I have to download every plugin when I'm using this tool on a server in a high-security zone with no internet access. Each plugin depends on another, so the plugins have to be installed in a particular order, or installing all the plugins is extremely difficult. If the prerequisite is not installed, and I install the other one, it goes out and gives me an error. It's a complicated process to do it.

When this tool does not satisfy a particular requirement, I map the requirement to some other tool and proceed with it. There are different tools for various use cases, so I use whatever I have. I don't expect a single product to provide all the functionalities I need.

I've been working on Jenkins for about a year.

If there isn't any problem with the server where Jenkins is installed, I don't have any issues with Jenkins. We have had to restart it a few times to free up memory, but we run it on a multi-node cluster. That helps because we can redirect traffic through one of the servers while we restart the other. Some minor restarts need to be done to free up memory, but we have redundancy in place so it doesn't affect the system availability.

Jenkins' scalability is good because we can connect it to as many repositories as possible. I can create a hierarchy of jobs and set up a proper workflow to trigger the jobs in sequence. One level of the hierarchy is the build steps, and on top of those, we have hierarchy of jobs. Each job can trigger another job as well.

We use Jenkins throughout the entire organization to deploy a lot of applications. Every software development team in my organization uses Jenkins. Our developers have standardized the process and created another tool on top of the Jenkins server. 

We primarily use community support. Jenkins is widely used, so the community knowledge base is very rich. For any given question we have, the chances are good that someone has been asked it a couple of years ago, and it has already been answered well. We only need to recreate the solution online. Support is extensive.

Google provides a service similar to Jenkins called Cloud Build, but we'd have to purchase it because it's not open source. And since it's provided a GCP service, it's on the cloud. Most of the features that Jenkins offers is are available GCP. However, the server infrastructure is managed by GCP, so we don't have the flexibility to configure and change many things about the way the system works. 

There is a set of features available to us, and we can put some parameters in place to make it work. But the problem is that Cloud Build isn't very flexible in terms of its configuration. We have the same issue with AWS CodeDeploy, another service like Jenkins.

Most of the configurations we do have already been set by the cloud provider. Let's say Jenkins asks us to configure five to 10 things, and the cloud provider only asks us to configure one or two. Again, the problem is we do not have the option to customize. 

What's more, GCP or AWS services for CI/CD pipelines are tied to the other services in the cloud. For example, AWS has its own source control system called as CodeCommit. CodeDeploy is connected to it and another service called Pipeline.

You can fluidly orchestrate code with minimal administration or configuration. All changes you make on CodeCommit go through the workflow by just inputting the scripts. You don't have to do a lot of configuration like you need to do in Jenkins. AWS takes care of all of that. You can put some approval process to see if the build has succeeded. You need someone to go in and approve it before it's deployed. All those things can be done that aren't possible in Jenkins.

If I'm installing Jenkins on Windows, it's a simple graphical user interface similar to any installer. I only have to specify the port where this needs to be installed to open it and then configure the login. It's not intuitive to figure out what needs to be done because Jenkins is open source. As soon as we install it, it outputs some text file to one of the folders where Jenkins has been installed, and we generally don't have an idea of where that file will be.

That's the kind of thing you have to figure out using community support. I go to that file, find the temporary password, and set the login credentials. After the installation, I access the specific port where the server was installed via a local host. Then I log in to the Jenkins server and start configuring all the necessary elements I want in my deployment process.

The initial setup takes about 15 to 20 minutes, but I sometimes face a bottleneck when installing the plugins on an offline machine. Mapping the dependencies and then installing the correct sequence of dependencies is a nightmare, and it took me two days to do it. However, it generally takes only a day to get it completely configured.

Sometimes the batch scripts or any scripts we put in place might be a version that Jenkins doesn't support. We either have to make sure our scripts are compatible with the Jenkins version or update Jenkins. That sort has happened, but it's rare. Maybe it's because I've only worked on Jenkins for a year, and I haven't seen a lot of difficulties over there. I think there should be some maintenance, but from my experience, I've found it to be very minimal.

Jenkins is completely open source. 

I'd rate Jenkins about six out of 10 because it doesn't have much out-of-the-box integration. Everything needs to be done manually. On the other hand, it's free, so that makes up for the shortcomings. It depends on an organization's needs and budget requirements because it's not something I pay for.

I would recommend it for certain use cases. It depends upon the project. For example, Jenkins might be suitable for a client who doesn't use a cloud provider to deploy their CI/CD pipelines, and they're deploying on their on-prem system. Also, if they're in their POC phase and are unsure how much budget will be allocated to the project, I definitely recommend Jenkins to be their first-go solution for a CI/CD pipeline.

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 are using the solution for integration purposes. We have our own DevOps pipeline. Jenkins is the key tool that is being used in the entire DevOps journey. It's like an automation build tool. It's a CI/CD: continuous integration and continuous deployment

We mostly enjoy the multi-branch pipeline support. We have multiple branches regarding, for example, the production environments. In this environment, we can use Jenkins for the deployment and integration of multiple branches.

The deploying and assessing of the development of our code and our application has been really useful. 

It's getting a bit easier for us to use Jenkins, and it is really helping us.

The solution is stable.

It can scale easily.

Jenkins is pretty flexible and integrates with many products. As of now in the market, there is no vendor dependency. They are providing a lot of plugins, so it's not very difficult to integrate with others.

If they could provide some release management and integrated security like JFrog Xray and JFrog SonarQube, that would be ideal. If they could have a built-in security assessment, like a run times security assessment, or some engine within Jenkins, that would be great. We are expecting a collaborative solution. We'd prefer not to have to go through third parties. We want everything in a single place and without having to deal with extra applications and expenses.

I would want to see if they can add some security engines or security modules within the Jenkins portal so people wouldn't have to buy or go for some other outside products. As of now, security is the biggest concern. That should be the first priority after any technology.

They need to improve their documentation. When you compare it to Red Hat documentation which is very nice, you find that Jenkins does not provide much helpful documentation.

The product needs to showcase more use cases. 

I've used the solution for eight to ten years.

The stability is good. it's reliable. I'd rate the stability four out of five. 

The solution can scale quite well. 

We only have 20 to 30 users on the product right now. It's something our development team uses daily.

The other people handle support cases. I'm not quite sure how quickly they respond since we have different infra teams, so they handle all these cases.

The only competitor to Jenkins is Argo CD for Jenkins. We are not using it yet.

The approach is now changing to GitOps. People are moving towards the GitOps rather than the old DevOps model. That's where the Argo CD or Flex comes in as alternative tools that are picking up interest in the market.

It would be easier to set up the solution if they offered better documentation. With more direction, it would be easier to deploy the solution. The steps shown in the documentation are not very clear. 

It shouldn't be like a puzzle. I have to search everywhere, every time, and Google what I need. Rather than going to blogs and some open-source community blogs, it's better to have its own documentation. It should be very straightforward and clearly show the steps, the minimum requirements, and the bottlenecks. It should all be centralized as well.

I'd rate the setup process a three out of five in terms of ease of implementation.

I'm not sure of the exact pricing of the product. My understanding is that it is not very expensive. It's an open-source tool. They do also have an enterprise version, which is what we use. It's the same tool whichever you use, however, with enterprise, you get support.

We are customers of Jenkins.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use Jenkins for CI/CD application. It helps us develop and push out applications. 

Jenkins is the most widely used development tool, so there are many plugins and it's easy to integrate. There is a large user base to provide community support, which I find very valuable. If I need to find a better way to do something, I can always get help from the community. Automation is about thinking outside of the box, and other users are constantly adding new plugins.

I would like them to provide space for people to have a central node that stores all the logs of workspace information in a distributed fashion to facilitate backup and restoration. Currently, everything is stored on one node, so you need to set up distributed storage or an endpoint that you can use for backing up your information. 

I have used Jenkins for five or six years.

Jenkins is highly stable. 

Jenkins can scale up. We have about 100-150 users working with it now. 

The documentation is extensive and community support is excellent.

I rate Jenkins eight out of 10 for ease of setup. Jenkins evolved from running on a virtual machine to deploying inside Kubernetes, which has simplified the setup. Running Jenkins inside Kubernetes is straightforward. The only challenge is configuring the backup. We have two people maintaining Jenkins by updating the plugins and server about once every other month. 

We deployed Jenkins in-house.

Jenkins is an open-source product, but you have the option to buy an enterprise license.

We usually just use Jenkins for the CI, continuous integration, part. That is the use case we have.

The performance is fine. With the huge chunk of connectors that it has, you can literally connect to anything, and you can add anything in the pipeline. The connector parts are seamlessly able to integrate into different products and systems. That is the best part.

The initial setup is pretty simple. 

It's stable. 

Whatever is commonly used and whatever I have required, I have always found that Jenkins has integration with those platforms. I'm fully satisfied on that front.

It would be helpful if they had a bit more interactive UI.

I've been using Jenkins for a while. I've used it at this organization and in my past organization.

The solution is stable. We haven't had any real issues. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

I can't comment on scalability as I have never really tried to scale it previously. It's not part of our requirements. 

I'm not sure how many people in our organization actually use the solution.

I've never needed that assistance of technical support. I can't speak to how useful they are if you run into issues. 

The implementation process is pretty straightforward. It's not too complex. 

I can't recall exactly how long it took to deploy.

Licensing is not my domain. I can't speak to the exact costs. 

Many teams use Jenkins here. Some may use it on the cloud, and others may use it on-premises. 

I'm using the latest version of the solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. The reason we love it is the huge amount of connectors that Jenkins has. It has seamless connectivity with literally every product from Octopus, and you can integrate everything into your pipeline seamlessly. That was the reason we switched to Jenkins.