Jenkins Reviews

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.

I mainly use Jenkins to create automatic triggers for pushing code.

Jenkins' most valuable feature is Pipeline.

Jenkins takes a long time to create archive files.

Jenkins' stability is good, and we haven't had any issues with downtime.

Jenkins is scalable in the sense that we can develop as many jobs as necessary. 

Jenkins' technical support team is small but helpful.

Positive

The initial setup isn't very complex, though it may take some time to create end scripts because it lies in the backend and needs to work during free integration time.

We used a uDeploy IBM product and team.

I would rate Jenkins eight out of ten.

Jenkins is basically used as a CI/CD tool, wherein you can integrate multiple tools that are part of your delivery pipeline. Jenkins is basically a controller for your delivery. For example, what happens, when it happens, and in what sequence it happens can be controlled by Jenkins.

Jenkins is a very mature product. 

It has got a lot of support as far as integrating Jenkins with other tools is concerned. 

There are a lot of plugins as well if you want to enable any feature or any automation as part of your delivery pipeline. There are a lot of plugins, actually, which are available both as part of an open-source as well as a commercial ecosystem.

It is easy to configure and easy to scale as well.

The initial setup is easy.

The enterprise version is less stable than the open-source version. 

Security is one area that is lacking a bit. You need to have that extra work done when you are adopting Jenkins. There are some features here and there, however, if security overall can be improved, that would be really great.

I've used the solution for more than ten years. 

The solution is stable. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze.

It is scalable. Jenkins can be implemented in a master play mode. You can have multiple masters and you can have multiple notes on which you can execute your jobs, which makes it very scalable.

We have about 500 people using Jenkins.

We've never contacted external support. We've only dealt with internal support. Internal support is very well educated in terms of supporting Jenkins and other tools of concern. I'm very satisfied.

Jenkins was the first product I used. Apart from Jenkins, there are other tools I've used, like Bamboo. Then, specific to the cloud, we have other DevOps services, and other pipelines.  I have used multiple options. Still, I'm kind of a Jenkins fan. I definitely recommend Jenkins over other tools.

The initial setup is very easy. It's not overly complex or difficult. You can enable a Jenkins pipeline, I would say, and a day, or less than a day.

We have about ten staff members that can handle deployment and maintenance. There are managers, developers, and DevOps teams, and then there are SYSops, admins, and DBAs. All these factors are there.

We handled the implementation ourselves, in-house. We didn't need any integrators or consultants.

One good thing about Jenkins is there are two flavors. One is open-source and the other is the commercial or the enterprise edition. The open-source version is pretty stable. For the security concern, you can add your own security-related intervention to make it that much more secure.

For the enterprise edition, you have a cloud-based which actually provides the commercial Jenkins version. Apart from security, they have come up with upgraded versions of Jenkins, for example, Jenkins Access Control and Jenkins Two-point Access Control. You can get added all kinds of features and the ease of implementing or managing your product. As I mentioned, Jenkins open-source is actually more stable and mature if you compare it to the enterprise version.

The solution can be on-premises or in the cloud. 

I'd recommend the solution to others.

I'd rate it ten out of ten.

Our main use cases are for restarting applications and monitoring system health. We instal the solution for companies and once it's up and running, we do all the health checks. We are customers of Jenkins and I'm a DevOps engineer. 

Jenkins has helped us to become more efficient and saves us a lot of time.

The solution is an integration tool and that is its value; we are able to integrate a lot of tools, whether it's Nexus for building automation, for plugins or repositories. This is what makes it a powerful tool. The most beneficial thing is being able to do everything with just one click, which was not possible previously when any changes needed to be carried out manually. Jenkins enables you to log in to multiple servers and it runs automatically on all your servers. 

I'd like to see some more features for scriptwriting and a more user-friendly UI for creating pipelines.

I've been using this solution for five years. 

We haven't had any problems with stability, even when we're running multiple builds. We use the product on a daily basis and although it doesn't require maintenance, there are some regular activities carried out by Jenkins every few months. 

If you're deploying on-premise, then scalability requires introducing new nodes and deploying application instances on two servers. We have multiple teams and they all have access to Jenkins so we currently have around 60 to 70 users.

We haven't had any problems with customer support. 

Our implementation process depends on what type of deployment is needed. If it's a very small chain and the deployment process is not complex, steps will be limited. If it's a larger implementation, more steps are involved and it becomes more complex. When needed, we have a networks team and a database team. For a small build, deployment can take 15 minutes. For a more complex build that has a lot of changes, it can take several hours.

It's important to know your requirements before implementing Jenkins. It's a good tool for integration and automation in an organization.

I rate the solution eight out of 10. 

I use Jenkins for CI/CD pipelines. 

Jenkins's automation and orchestration features have significantly improved workflows by automating various processes. Initially, it did not support YAML manifesting or GitOps, but recent versions have introduced these capabilities. Now, the tool supports importing manifest files from Git repositories, enabling the implementation of GitOps pipelines. Compared to other tools like GitLab, it has become a mature tool for running CI/CD pipelines.

While some integrations were difficult and time-consuming, others were more straightforward, requiring only a few clicks. The tool benefits from a community of plugin providers that offer various plugins for various functionalities.

Integrating Jenkins with other tools or solutions has presented some challenges. For instance, when attempting to integrate Jenkins with Kubernetes, I encountered numerous errors, which took several days to resolve. In Jenkins, adding a feature typically involves incorporating the repository feature separately. Jenkins lacks built-in Git repository functionality, necessitating an external Git repository to store Jenkins manifests.

In contrast, GitLab offers an integrated Git repository and pipeline runner, streamlining the process. One improvement for Jenkins could be integrating a Git server, simplifying the management of CI/CD pipelines. Currently, with Jenkins, modifying pipeline manifests requires navigating to a separate Git repository. In GitLab, however, manifest changes can be made directly within the repository.

I have been working with the product for two to three years. 

I've experienced some performance issues with Jenkins. It's using a PostgreSQL server to store its data, and currently, we're facing slow loading times for the tool pages. This slowness is due to many teams currently using it, which strains the database and slows performance. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to resolve this issue despite working on it for a year. As a result, loading the pages can take up to 15 seconds.

Scalability is dependent on the database. The solution uses PostgreSQL as the default option, although other options are available. However, in our case, PostgreSQL's performance is currently quite low, which affects scalability. My company has 300-400 users. In our company, Jenkins is more widely used than Tekton. Approximately 70 percent of our organization's members utilize Jenkins, while the remaining 30 percent use Tekton.

If I compare Jenkins with Tekton, Jenkins has a more mature dashboard, which allows for control over pipelines. Additionally, Jenkins offers numerous plugins that facilitate integration with other tools. For instance, integrating your pipeline with an email server is straightforward with the appropriate plugin, making integration much easier than with Tekton.

The initial setup process isn't straightforward. While installing the Jenkins server is easy, adding agents for it can be complex. Setting up the Jenkins server is quick, often done through a Docker image. However, adding new agents, essential for tasks like building CI/CD pipelines, is not as simple. In my experience, it took considerable time to add agents, whether they were Kubernetes agents or agents on Linux machines, to the Jenkins server.

When I first installed and used the tool, it took me around three days to set up a production-ready Jenkins server. It was my first time using it. However, compared to other tools like Tekton, which took me only about half a day to install and set up for using pipeline and CI/CD workflows.

The tool's maintenance costs are low because you can upgrade the Jenkins server and agents without incurring additional costs. It's not dependent on the underlying system, which keeps operational costs down. I believe Tekton's cost of operations is lower.

Compared with Tekton, Jenkins can help save costs and improve efficiency in our project. It supports a library feature, allowing us to reuse code and avoid repetitive tasks, ultimately reducing operational expenses.

The tool is open-source. 

If someone asked me which CI/CD tool I recommend, I would suggest GitLab. However, if someone must choose between Jenkins and Tekton, I recommend Jenkins. I rate the product a six out of ten. 

We use the solution for continuous integration and deployment.

The deployment time has reduced considerably. Since we started using it, the solution has taken care of everything that we used to do manually. It helps us with the automation of the deployment process.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its integration between different tools.

The dashboard needs to be improved. Though the access management and authentication functionalities are present, the dashboard and UI could be more user-friendly. The product has many plug-ins. Users have to go through the documentation to be able to use the product.

The UI must be more user-friendly. The information should be available in the dashboard itself. The users shouldn’t have to refer to the documentation. When a user hovers over the elements on the dashboard, it should reveal information about them.

I have been using the solution for the past three years.

The tool is very stable. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

The tool is highly scalable. I rate the scalability an eight out of ten. We have around 600 to 700 users in the organization. We are using the tool 24/7.

CloudBees provides us with support for the product. It takes time to get a response from the support team. The response time for support must be reduced.

Neutral

The initial setup of the solution was complicated. I rate the ease of setup a six out of ten. We had to refer to additional materials to understand how to incorporate and integrate plug-ins with different software and endpoints. The setup and planning process took around one to two days.

To deploy the solution, we need a Kubernetes cluster. We implemented the solution in-house. We need one or two DevOps administrators to deploy the solution. Depending on the workload, we need five to six people to maintain the product.

We have saved time on deployment. Once the developers add new features to the application, the deployment process takes only a few minutes. We have received an ROI of almost 80% to 90%.

The product is expensive. The open-source version is free, but small companies would not be able to afford the cloud-based version. I rate the pricing an eight out of ten. Additionally, we have to pay for the product’s support.

People must consider the solution for enterprise support if they find it easy to read the documentation. If an organization has a good number of people for maintenance, they can choose the product. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of 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 trigger the URL and necessary files in a batch. Jenkins is integrated with Jira and Litmus. We'll put a URL into Jenkins and trigger it. We can schedule it to run overnight every day, week, month, etc. 

Multiple teams are using Jenkins, and it's integrated with multiple Jira plugins. I believe around 250 people using it.

We can schedule anything with Jenkins, which is useful for deployment or anything that requires scheduling. It also has multiple plugins we can use for Maven, JUnit, etc.

Jenkins could have better cloud functionality. Currently, we are using the existing legacy model, but we are moving toward the cloud, so it would be great if they could improve in that area. In the future, I would like more cloud features and related training materials, like a video tutorial. 

I've been using Jenkins for one year, and I know about related automation tools like Selenium, Tosca, etc.

Jenkins' main advantage over other solutions is multiple plugins and ease of setup. Open-source and secured versions are also available, so maybe that's why there are multiple processes. Other deployment tools cost more, and the setup is messy. These are some reasons management decided to use Jenkins instead of other solutions.

The Jenkins setup is easy because it's open-source, and we can get a community edition. We don't need to do anything. We only need to install it and it's ready to use. The total deployment time depends on how long you have to code. In my case, it generally takes half an hour to one hour.

I rate Jenkins eight out of 10. It's a scalable, open-source tool with multiple plugins. It's easy to use and set up. I don't rate it 10 because there is room for improvement in terms of the cloud and related capabilities. 

If somebody wants to use Jenkins, they need to first consider the scope. What is the scope, and what tech are you using? Jenkins is easy to set up, and we can integrate it with multiple technologies, whether a .NET application or anything else. We can deploy the code and can run with that.