长期选择 Hudson 和 CruiseControl
我的目的是在 CruiseControl 和 Hudson 之间选择作为 java 桌面应用程序的持续集成工具。 我看过很多比较 Hudson 和 CruiseControl 的文章。 就功能和易用性而言，Hudson 似乎是最好的。
但就坚固性、可靠性和重型配置而言，最后从长远来看，这仍然是真的吗？
My purpose is to chose between CruiseControl and Hudson as continuous integration tool for java desktop application.
I have seen lots of reading comparing Hudson and CruiseControl.
In terms of features and ease of use, Hudson seems the best.
But in terms of robustness, reliability with heavy configuration and finally in the long term, is this still true ?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问，欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论，获取更多帮助，或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱，如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论，将不能在第一时间通知您！
发布评论
评论（7）
我的票投给了哈德森。
我建议选择 Hudson，永远不要回头。
My vote goes to Hudson.
I'd say go for Hudson and never look back.
我们使用 CruiseControl 来构建我们的库和应用程序。 我们将它用于 C++ 和 Python 开发，而不是 Java。 最近我们改用Hudson，效果非常好。 我们喜欢的主要功能是：
We were using CruiseControl to build our libraries and applications. We were using it for C++ and Python development, not Java. Recently we switched to Hudson with very good results. The main features we liked were:
我也建议您看看 TeamCity。 我们从 CruiseControl 更改为 TeamCity，并且有很多新的有用功能，例如取消构建等。
I'd recommend to have a look at TeamCity too. We changed from CruiseControl to TeamCity and there are a lot of new and useful features like cancelling a build etc.
我已经使用 Hudson 有一段时间了，对此我很满意。
不过我还没用过Teamcity。
如果成本是一个问题，那么 Hudson 应该是一个明显的选择。 社区贡献非常健康。
I have been using Hudson for quite a while and am happy with it.
I havent used Teamcity though.
If cost is a concern, then Hudson should be an obvious choice. The community contributions are very healthy.
几年前问自己同样的问题，在阅读评论、比较等之后，我选择了哈德逊。
它很容易配置，几年后没有问题，只配置了 4-5 个项目，所以我不确定这是否符合您所说的“重型配置”，但它对我来说工作顺利。
Asked myself the same question a couple of years ago and after reading reviews, comparing , etc I went for Hudson.
It was easy to configure, had no problem after several years, had only 4-5 projects configured so I'm not sure if this qualifies as "heavy configuration" as you're stating, but it worked smoothly for me.
我最近也面临同样的决定。 我开始安装 CruiseControl.NET 和 Hudson，并先修改其中一个，然后再修改另一个。 不过，很快我就在哈德森身上获得了动力。 我们现在坚定地使用Hudson，并且我没有进一步接触CruiseControl.NET（无论如何我都没有那么深入）。 所以我可以证明 Hudson 可以很好地设置在 .NET 世界中。
I recently faced this same decision. I started installing both CruiseControl.NET and Hudson and would tinker with one, then the other. Pretty soon, though, I gained momentum with Hudson. We're now solidly using Hudson and I've not touched CruiseControl.NET any further (not that I was that far into it anyways). So I can attest that Hudson can be setup in a .NET world just fine.
我们两年前开始使用 CruseiControl。 刚开始的时候是很痛苦的，每一次改变都是痛苦的。 然后我们转向哈德逊。 我爱上了:-)
We started using CruseiControl two years ago. It was a lot of pain getting it started, and every change was painful. We then switched to Hudson. And I'm in love :-)