我们使用 TFS 2008，它对我们有用，因为我们几乎是一个全 MS 环境...但是，我也使用了 FinalBuilder，它的功能比我见过的任何其他东西都要多，并且在使用混合技术（例如多个 SCM）的环境中特别有用。
We use TFS 2008 which works for us because we're pretty much an all MS environment... however, I've also used FinalBuilder, which has more features than just about anything else I've seen and would be especially useful in environments where you were using a mix of technologies (multiple SCM's for example).
I second Peter's recommendation for Hudson. Continuum and Hudson are both very easy to set-up and use (compared to CruiseControl), but Hudson offers a lot more functionality. If you're interested, I've previously written about why I would choose Hudson.
此外，Lunbuild 还提供了很好的访问控制粒度。 我没有使用太多 CI 工具，但这是我的公司从 Cruise Control 转向 Luntbuild 的主要原因。 我们希望让客户端能够访问构建服务器，以便他们可以提取每日构建等，但我们无法让他们访问其他客户端的构建。
We use LuntBuild which works perfectly with maven.
In addition, Lunbuild offers a good deal of granularity for access control. I haven't used too many CI tools, but that was the main reason my company switched to Luntbuild from Cruise Control. We wanted to give clients access to the build server so they could pull daily builds, etc, but we couldn't have them accessing other clients' builds.
We have had great success with Hudson. It is easy to install and configure, has a great range of plugins and a good web user interface. The checkstyle and cobertura code coverage plugins are two that we use.
发布评论
评论（9）
我们使用 TFS 2008，它对我们有用，因为我们几乎是一个全 MS 环境...但是，我也使用了 FinalBuilder，它的功能比我见过的任何其他东西都要多，并且在使用混合技术（例如多个 SCM）的环境中特别有用。
We use TFS 2008 which works for us because we're pretty much an all MS environment... however, I've also used FinalBuilder, which has more features than just about anything else I've seen and would be especially useful in environments where you were using a mix of technologies (multiple SCM's for example).
我赞同 Peter 对 Hudson 的推荐。 Continuum 和 Hudson 都非常易于设置和使用（与 CruiseControl 相比），但 Hudson 提供了更多功能。 如果您有兴趣，我有
如果可以的话，TeamCity 及其预先测试的提交功能也是一个不错的选择遵守免费专业许可证的限制（最多 20 个用户和 20 种构建配置）。
I second Peter's recommendation for Hudson. Continuum and Hudson are both very easy to set-up and use (compared to CruiseControl), but Hudson offers a lot more functionality. If you're interested, I've previously written about why I would choose Hudson.
TeamCity, with its pre-tested commit functionality, is also a good choice if you can live with the limitations of a free Professional Licence (maximum of 20 users and 20 build configurations).
由于我已经从 Ant 切换到 Maven 作为我的构建系统，Continuum 是显而易见的选择。 它非常干净，提供了我需要的所有功能。
Since I've switched from Ant to Maven as my build system, Continuum is the obvious choice. It's very clean and offers all the features that I need.
我们使用 Bamboo。
有关各种主要 CI 服务器的相当广泛的功能矩阵，请查看：http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/CC/CI+Feature+Matrix
We use Bamboo.
For a rather extensive feature matrix of the various major CI servers, have a look at: http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/CC/CI+Feature+Matrix
JetBrain 的 TeamCity 非常酷。
JetBrain's TeamCity is pretty cool.
TFS 2008 非常好，
CruiseControl 和 Nant 也不错。
看看 CI 工厂，它需要最少的配置
TFS 2008 is pretty good
As are CruiseControl and Nant
Have a look at CI factory, which requires minimal configuration
TFS 2008 相当不错。 它在 TFS 构建中内置了持续集成。
TFS 2008 is pretty good. It has continuous integration built in to TFS build.
我们使用 LuntBuild，它与 Maven 完美配合。
此外，Lunbuild 还提供了很好的访问控制粒度。 我没有使用太多 CI 工具，但这是我的公司从 Cruise Control 转向 Luntbuild 的主要原因。 我们希望让客户端能够访问构建服务器，以便他们可以提取每日构建等，但我们无法让他们访问其他客户端的构建。
We use LuntBuild which works perfectly with maven.
In addition, Lunbuild offers a good deal of granularity for access control. I haven't used too many CI tools, but that was the main reason my company switched to Luntbuild from Cruise Control. We wanted to give clients access to the build server so they could pull daily builds, etc, but we couldn't have them accessing other clients' builds.
我们与 Hudson 取得了巨大成功。 它易于安装和配置，具有大量的插件和良好的网络用户界面。 checkstyle 和 cobertura 代码覆盖率插件是我们使用的两个插件。
We have had great success with Hudson. It is easy to install and configure, has a great range of plugins and a good web user interface. The checkstyle and cobertura code coverage plugins are two that we use.