Hudson 还是 Teamcity 进行持续集成？
我们是一家 Java 商店，正在寻找可以使用的 CI 工具。 Hudson 和 Teamcity 似乎是免费的，但 Teamcity 似乎更灵活并且提供更多支持。
我想知道为什么人们仍然会使用 Hudson，是否有人可以提供任何支持/反对的论据？
We are a Java shop looking for a CI tool to use.
Both Hudson and Teamcity seem to be free but Teamcity seems slicker and with more support.
I was wondering why one would still use Hudson and if anyone could provide any argument for/against either?
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（9）
Team City 是迄今为止最好的 CI 服务器。对我来说，它的杀手级功能是与 IDE（IntelliJ、Eclipse 和 VisualStudio）的紧密集成。例如，它可以向您显示您在 IDE 中编辑的文件何时过时、谁更改了该文件以及更改了哪些内容。您可以从 IDE 提交到 CI 服务器，在构建网格上运行 comile 和测试，然后如果构建成功，CI 服务器将提交。您可以单击 CI Web 应用程序中的构建报告，它将在 IDE 中打开相应的文件。
有可用的插件（我写了一个：http://team-piazza.googlecode.com），但是不多。
Team City is by far and away the best CI server out there. Its killer feature for me is the tight integration with IDEs (IntelliJ, Eclipse and VisualStudio). It can show you, for example, when a file you're editing in the IDE becomes out of date, who changed it and what they changed. You can commit from the IDE to the CI server, run the comile and tests on the build grid, and then the CI server will commit if the build is successful. You can click on build reports in the CI web app and it will open the appropriate files in the IDE.
There are plugins available (I wrote one: http://team-piazza.googlecode.com), but not many.
哈德森+1。
Hudson 是一个非常活跃的项目，拥有广泛的用户社区和活跃用户邮件列表，非常容易上手，易于使用，已被用于巨大、非常巨大的项目（ JBoss、JAX-WS 等），因此具有成功的记录，提供非常好的高级功能（例如构建矩阵、构建集群等），是开源的，有很多插件...
并且如果支持这确实是一件重要的事情，您可以从 Sun 获得商业支持。但FWIW，我从未遇到过 Hudson 的任何阻塞问题。更新： 如您所知，Kohsuke Kawaguchi（Hudson 的创建者）已经离开 Sun/Oracle 并开始了他的 自己的公司 将 Hudson 带到下一个阶段。换句话说，这对于哈德森来说并不是威胁。如果您正在寻求支持，您可以通过订阅计划获取 Hudson CI Server 的认证版本 （这个认证版本捆绑了 Hudson 的高质量版本和一组预定义的插件以及一些商业插件）。
更新：为了说明各自用户群的规模，以下是 确实（实时查询）：
这当然不是一个技术指标。
+1 for Hudson.
Hudson is a very active project, has a wide community of users and an active users mailing list, is really easy to start with, is easy to use, has been used on huge, very huge, projects (JBoss, JAX-WS, etc) and thus has proven records of success, offers very nice advanced features (e.g. build matrix, build clustering, etc), is open source, has a lot of plugins...
And if support is really an important thing, you can get commercial support from Sun. But FWIW, I never faced any blocking problem with Hudson.Update: As you may know, Kohsuke Kawaguchi (the creator of Hudson) has left Sun/Oracle and started his own company to take Hudson to the next stage. In other words, this is not a threat for Hudson. And if you are looking for support, you can get a certified version of Hudson CI Server as part of a subscription plan (this certified version bundles a high quality release of Hudson with a predefined set of plugins plus some commercial one).
Update: To illustrate the size of their respective user base, here is a comparison of job trends for several CI tools on Indeed (live query):
This is of course not a technical indicator.
我们一开始与 Hudson 合作开发了几个 Flex 项目，然后当 .NET 开发人员加入我们的 CI 工作时，我们迁移到了 TeamCity。现在我们再次更换了 TeamCity 服务器，回到 Hudson。主要原因有：
- 充满活力的哈德逊社区，比支持更好。
- 适用于各种任务的大量插件。
- 开源。
- Hudson 是免费的，TeamCity 仅对 10 个项目免费。
编辑：TeamCity 现在对 20 个项目免费。
We started out with Hudson for a couple of Flex projects, then we migrated to TeamCity, when the .NET developers joined our CI efforts. Now we have replaced the TeamCity server again, back to Hudson. The main reasons are:
- The vibrant Hudson community, better than support.
- The huge amount of plugins for every kind of tasks.
- The open source.
- Hudson is for free, TeamCity is only free for 10 projects.
edit: TeamCity is now free for 20 projects.
TeamCity 很棒，因为它允许每个开发人员拥有自己的构建配置文件并从他们的 IDE 挂钩。孤独是“踢屁股”。还有对GIT等的支持，认真看一下。专业版是免费的。
TeamCity is great because it allows each developer to have their own build profile and hook into it from their IDE. That a lone is 'butt-kickin'. There is also support for GIT etc. Seriously take a look at it. The professional version is free.
反对 Hudson 的最大论据是每个版本都会引入新的错误。
发布非常频繁，因此您必须经常升级，以免落后。这意味着您需要投入大量时间来诊断问题并回滚到以前的 Hudson 版本。 （有时回滚甚至是不可能的！）
我们正在我们的商店中引入持续部署（当您签入代码时，它会部署在实时站点上！）并且与 Hudson 的斗争让我们付出了太多代价。
我们正在积极考虑迁移到 TeamCity，纯粹是因为 Hudson 错误的成本。
The biggest argument against Hudson is that every release introduces new bugs.
Releases are very frequent, so you have to upgrade frequently so you don't fall behind. That means that you need to devote a lot of time to diagnosing issues and rolling back to previous Hudson releases. (Sometimes a rollback isn't even possible!)
We are introducing Continuous Deployment in our shop (when you check in code, it gets deployed on the live site!) and having to wrestle with Hudson is costing us too much.
We are actively looking at migrating to TeamCity purely because of the cost of Hudson's bugs.
我真的很喜欢 Teamcity，但在我正在使用的环境中，通过管理层获取 Teamcity 采购订单所需的时间可能会超过将所有内容迁移到 Hudson 所需的时间。
I really liked Teamcity but in the environment I am working it, the time it would take to get a Purchase Order for Teamcity through the layers of management would likely have exceeded the time it took to migrate everything over to Hudson.
我之前使用并设置过 TeamCity 和 Jenkins（又名新的 Hudson），但我同意 TeamCity 的设置要巧妙得多，它仅对 10 名或更少用户的团队免费。这两个系统都非常容易设置，并且都有一个得到良好支持的插件系统。 TeamCity 的杀手级功能是预签入工作流程，您可以在将代码签入源代码管理之前对其进行测试，而 Jenkins 的优点在于，即使您的用户数量超过 10 个并构建代理，它也是完全免费的。
I have used and setup TeamCity and Jenkins (aka the new Hudson) before and while I would agree that TeamCity is a lot slicker to set up it is only free for teams of 10 users or less. Both systems are very easy to set up and have a plugin system that is well supported. The killer feature in TeamCity is the pre-checkin workflow where you can test code before checking it into source control and the nicety of Jenkins is that it is completely free even if you grow beyond the 10 users and build agents.
我刚刚开始习惯 hudson，准备进行实验，看看它如何适合我们当前的环境。我对 Teamcity 的经验绝对为零，因此无法对此发表评论，但到目前为止我很享受与 Hudson 合作。
hudson 有很多插件，而且 hudson 网站为您提供了大量编写自己的插件的建议（http://wiki.hudson-ci.org/display/HUDSON/Extend+Hudson）。
I'm just starting to get used to hudson ready to experiment and see how it will fit into our current environment. I have absolutely zero experience with Teamcity so can't comment on that but I am enjoying working with hudson thus far.
There are lots of plugins for hudson plus the hudson site gives you plenty of advice for writing your own (http://wiki.hudson-ci.org/display/HUDSON/Extend+Hudson).
我一直向客户推荐他们考虑使用 Bamboo。原因是（好吧，通过阅读规格表！）它具有与 TeamCity 非常相似的功能集。然而，主要的好处是与 JIRA 非常紧密的集成，JIRA 作为功能/错误跟踪系统非常流行。完整的套件包括 JIRA、Greenhopper、Bamboo 和 Eclipse。相当多的客户也有 HP 质量中心，并且也有一些插件可以将其连接到 JIRA。我还喜欢 JIRA、Bamboo 和 GreenHopper 都来自 Atlassian。
I've been recommending to clients that they consider Bamboo. The reason being that (ok, from reading the spec sheets!) it has a very similar feature set to TeamCity. However the main benefit is very tight integration with JIRA which is quite popular as a feature/bug tracking system. The complete suite being JIRA, Greenhopper, Bamboo and Eclipse. Quite a few clients also have HP Quality centre and there are plugins which joins that to JIRA as well. I also like the fact that JIRA, Bamboo and GreenHopper all come from Atlassian.