Jenkins Reviews

Jenkins is an old product, and we encounter performance issues and slow response. Also, some of the plugins are not stable. 

I have been working with the product for eight years. 

I rate Jenkins' stability a six out of ten. 

I rate the product's scalability an eight out of ten. My company has 150 users for Jenkins. 

The deployment of traditional Jenkins is easy. I rate cloud-based deployment a five out of ten. It takes half and hour to complete. 

We use the tool's free version. 

Jenkins has broad community support. I rate it a nine out of ten. 

We use Jenkins for database products and automation of other applications as well.

When we have manual tasks, we have to depend on multiple technical teams. With Jenkins, we can bring all the technologies together by the click of a button. We can see results without having to depend on different teams. Jenkins makes life easy for the database and DevOps teams.

Tasks such as deployment, cloning, database switchover, and all other database missions and tasks are being done through Jenkins. If a job does not go through, at times the error message does not clearly indicate what caused the failure. I have to escalate it to the Jenkins DevOps team just to see what caused the failure. If the error message is clear, then I wouldn't have to escalate the issue to different teams.

I've been working with Jenkins for two years.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Jenkin's stability at three.

It is scalable because the Jenkins jobs are in AWS, whereas the deployments are being done on-premises. My understanding is that these will be brought on-premises as well.

We have 10 plus users for the database and application teams. We have less than 50 databases.

If you want to have a single-pane-of-glass view in terms of automation, you can go for Jenkins. It does the job it's supposed to do. Therefore, I would give this solution a rating of seven out of ten.

We are using Jenkins for running our test jobs, and multi-cluster deployments in the cloud.

The most valuable feature of Jenkins is its continuous deployment. We can deploy to multi-cluster and multi-regions in the cloud.

Jenkins could improve by allowing more scripting languages. We need to use Groovy scripting and it is difficult to debug and it is not ideal for creating file scripts. We tried to search for assistance but we did not find much help.

I have been working with Jenkins for approximately three years.

Jenkins is not always stable. We have encountered approximately 20 percent downtime.

The scalability of Jenkins could improve. If we are running a lot of jobs, it is not scaling up or down very well.

We have multiple jobs running and they can be between 50 to 100 at a time.

I have not used another solution prior to Jenkins.

The initial setup of Jenkins is a one-click deployment to multiple regions which is helpful. Additionally, it is easy to configure, and it is straightforward.

Jenkins is easy to maintain.

My advice to others is they should use Jenkins in the cloud. If they try to access the solution outside of the cloud environment, you need to configure whitelists and other configurations and keep an eye on them.

I rate Jenkins a seven 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. 

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. 

We primarily use the solution as a build automation tool.

If we have to do some automation, we have to deploy the code on a server, and on the production server, so we can create a Jenkins pipeline, which we can call from Jenkins itself. Therefore, whenever we want to deploy the code on a server, on the production server, we use the Jenkins pipeline.

Within the organization, we have to manage nine applications as DevOps engineers. My expertise is in Unix, so whenever they need any Unix-related help, I'm on it. Okay. For all the nine teams I have to maintain their tasks. It is up to me and I can use Jenkins, Ansible, et cetera. 

From a deployment perspective, we don't require any passwords or any permissions and all. Everything we can do from Jenkins.

Whenever something fails, so we have the facility to check the logs. Based on that, we can find the solutions and we can fix things.

The initial setup is simple.

The stability of Jenkins is good.

The dashboards are very good.

The solution has been very easy to use.

We have found that the solution offers very good, very clear documentation. Everything is laid out well and easy to explain to a new user.

There are some 13 commands that we cannot run for Jenkins. For those particular commands, for the smallest small command (not the bigger task at a deeper level), for example, a copy command, we cannot run it from Jenkins. We cannot change the ownership of any directory or file or any kind of directory. In that case, we have a dependency on, for example, Ansible. There are some limited commands in Jenkins. 

I joined this current organization in November of 2019. From November 2019 onwards, I've been using this. It's been approximately two years at this point.

The solution has been very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. 

In some cases, it is a very reliable solution and tool. We had some dependencies, however, we have another solution for those dependencies. Whenever we do not have any dependencies somewhere else, we can use Jenkins.

I've never attempted to scale Jenkins.

My team has nine applications. Our organization has between 250 to 300 people. Many people are using the product. I'm not sure how many teams we have, however, I am sure that all the teams are using Jenkins.

I don't directly deal with technical support. Typically, I create a ticket, however, usually,  I try troubleshooting from my end. If the issue is not from our end, we have to raise a GR ticket and it takes approximately 24 to 48 hours to get it resolved, or for them to actually get in touch with us. 

In my company, we also have a Sharepoint that contains troubleshooting documentation that is quite helpful.

I was previously using Ansible.

The solution offers easy deployment. We just need to follow some steps and we have to give some URL paths and that's all. It's not time-consuming.

Initially, we do the setup for a particular or one particular task. If whenever we get a request in the future and based on the task, we just make a copy of that initial task and we do the minor changes and in that way, we can implement new tasks very easily.

We have a Jenkins central team. Whenever they upgrade, they send us a notification. A separate team handles the upgrade.

We are able to implement the solution for our clients.

I understand that the licensing is renewed about once a year. The pricing itself is fine. I wouldn't describe it as being overly expensive.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using.

I'm just using this tool to automate items for my teams. Whenever my team requires my help, I support them.

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations, however, it depends on the requirement and what exactly the users need. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

1) Easy to install and setup (including setup to run as windows service)

2) Free and always available alternative to any other build solutions

3) Relatively simple and intuitive UI

4) Big number of pretty useful plugins

5) Easily configurable and scalable

In some of my projects I had a chance to participate we used to use some commercial solutions like TeamCity or Bamboo. Since we had limited number of build machines and build agents it was really hard to organize automated acceptance and high-level system test runs as it took a while to perform the run.

Even more, since we had restricted number of build agents the huge number of long-running tests could make serious bottle-neck to the entire build process, hence, the feedback is a bit delayed. Jenkins appeared to be a good alternative to become parallel infrastructure purely dedicated for testing.

The bottle-neck problem was mitigated and we were able to make large scale runs on infinite basis. Thus, we could get results 2-3 times a day instead of 1 which brought us more consolidated and consistent picture about application under test state during the day. This trick was helpful for me on many projects

A lot of features (even small ones) can be taken from existing analogs. E.g.:

1) Ability to control interim status messages. This feature exists in TeamCity where you can log a message of specific format and it could change the build text and temporary status. In particular it's useful to see the number of tests already passed/failed without waiting for the completion

2) When we need to restart the server while some jobs are running it could be useful to re-run those dropped jobs after restart automatically.

3) There is some set of plugins which is being set up very frequently for many projects. It could be useful to have some pre-defined installations which either contain all necessary plugins by default or install them at the initial run (to decrease the size of initial application package)

Generally, other systems have lots of features which could be useful to see in Jenkins

Since 2009. At that time it was called Hudson

No. Deployment easiness is one of the advantages of Jenkins

From time to time Jenkins experiences problems after 1-2 weeks of intensive work (where at least 1-2 jobs are running at any point of time).

There used to be some issues when entire configurations could become invisible from the UI (usually that could happen after unexpected system shut down or even simple configuration rename operation) which was a bit painful. But I didn't encounter such problems in the most recent versions. So, it definitely indicates that some work at this direction was definitely done.

No

Never had a chance to communicate

Never had a chance to communicate

Mainly Jenkins used to be either main system or parallel solution. Major reason for using it was mainly related to:

1) Licensing

2) Limited capacity of build agents

Setup is pretty straightforward

Both in-house and vendor

It's free. There's no advice required

We used Jenkins for integration purposes, primarily for integrating with version control systems like Git and build tools such as Maven. Later, there were plans to use it in Docker deployment for Docker containers. 

I configured environments for non-production, production, and development in the pipeline. 

I also used Jenkins for a Bluegreen deployment strategy, quality assurance with SonarQube, and artifact storage in JFrog Artifactory.

In our previous company, Jenkins was used for complete automation of build and deployment in a project. From part of automation and customization, I was involved in the project.

The most valuable feature of Jenkins is the plugins available. You name any tool, and there is a plugin available for it in Jenkins. 

Also, the ability to customize these plugins is valuable. Its user-friendliness stands out, especially in its user interface which allows easy installation and configuration.

Jenkins could improve in areas related to Kubernetes and Docker container integration, like machine allocation of nodes and Marshaling integration improvements. Making these aspects more robust would be beneficial.

I have been using Jenkins for around five years now.

Jenkins is stable. Any tool can have latency of a few seconds, but I would rate Jenkins four and a half out of five for its stability.

Jenkins is not as scalable compared to container solutions like Docker or Kubernetes. While it can be configured at the server end, the other solutions offer more robust automation and scalability.

My team handles technical support for Jenkins when necessary. However, since I moved into AI and machine learning projects, I haven't been closely involved with technical support issues.

Positive

The initial setup of Jenkins is very straightforward and not difficult.

By installing Jenkins in a master-slave environment, there is significant cost saving, making it a cost-effective tool compared to other CI tools.

I do not have extensive knowledge on the pricing or licensing aspect as I used Jenkins for free at the local machine level. However, it is generally regarded as cost-effective.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.