我将默认我的“舒适”答案。如果您的团队对此没有任何强烈的感觉，并且 TFS 是您的新 TL 最适合使用的技术，请使用 TFS。尤其是 TFS 2010，对于 CI 来说完全足够了。
如果您的团队有异议，我建议您询问他们的理由并进行研究以找出哪个更好。
I will default to my "comfortable" answer. If your team doesn't have any strong feelings about it, and TFS is the technology with which your new TL is most comfortable, use TFS. Especially with TFS 2010, it's perfectly adequate for CI.
If your team has objections, I suggest you ask them their reasons and do the research to find which would be better.
We are a $2.5B solar manufacturing company using TFS to manage all our software artifacts. We use continuous integration for most of our projects and it works great. We also use it in an Agile/Scrum environment, or at least we're moving in that direction.
只要您仅执行最基本的操作（获取、编译），TFS 就可以很好地工作，但是一旦您需要部署、运行测试、更新数据库、复制文件等，它就会崩溃很糟糕。我不得不编写奇怪的未记录的 XML 配置文件以及大量的 hack 和变通方法才能使其正常工作。此外，这些部分的文档也不存在。避免。
I have used TFS (pre-2010) for CI and found the CI part of it to be an absolute disaster.
TFS works pretty well as long as you only do the most basic stuff possible (fetch, compile), but as soon as you need to deploy, run tests, update database, copy files etc, it breaks down badly. I had to resort to writing weird undocumented XML config files and lots of hacks and work arounds to get it working. Also, documentation for these parts are non-existing. Avoid.
I've found TeamCity to be very easy to install and configure, but it is also immensely powerful. If you think you'll need scalability, TeamCity may be a good choice.
TFS 可以满足您所需的一切，并且设置和使用 CI 相对简单。人们面临的主要问题是许可证，但如果您已经拥有许可证/这不是问题，那么 TFS 就不会有任何问题。
TFS does everything you need, and is relatively straightforward to set up and get going with CI. The main issue people have is licencing, but if you already have licences/that's not an issue, you shouldn't have any problems with TFS.
您可能希望将我们的 Parabuild 添加到您的列表中。它是一个商业持续集成服务器。 Parabuild 对小型团队免费。全面披露：我是 Parabuild 制造商 Viewtier Systems 的核心开发人员。
You might want to add our Parabuild to your list. It is a commercial Continuous Integration server. Parabuild is free for small teams. Full disclosure: I am a core developer at Viewtier Systems, makers of Parabuild.
I would recommend you look at Hudson which I find excellent for building all kinds of stuff. We use it for repackaging upstream debian packages, C++ internal tools, Ruby apps and of course Java apps.
It integrates with a lot of popular other tools, version control systems, browsers, issue trackers, extreme feedback devices, etc... It allows to scale horizontally by adding slave servers to increase throughput.
Creating new jobs is very easy in the Web Interface.
I've used TeamCity at several jobs as a Continuous Integration server. The TeamCity integration for Eclipse is very good and prevents a lot of downtime with larger teams.
发布评论
评论（9）
我将默认我的“舒适”答案。如果您的团队对此没有任何强烈的感觉，并且 TFS 是您的新 TL 最适合使用的技术，请使用 TFS。尤其是 TFS 2010，对于 CI 来说完全足够了。
如果您的团队有异议，我建议您询问他们的理由并进行研究以找出哪个更好。
I will default to my "comfortable" answer. If your team doesn't have any strong feelings about it, and TFS is the technology with which your new TL is most comfortable, use TFS. Especially with TFS 2010, it's perfectly adequate for CI.
If your team has objections, I suggest you ask them their reasons and do the research to find which would be better.
我们是一家价值 2.5B 美元的太阳能制造公司，使用 TFS 来管理我们所有的软件工件。我们对大多数项目都使用持续集成，而且效果很好。我们还在敏捷/Scrum 环境中使用它，或者至少我们正在朝这个方向前进。
We are a $2.5B solar manufacturing company using TFS to manage all our software artifacts. We use continuous integration for most of our projects and it works great. We also use it in an Agile/Scrum environment, or at least we're moving in that direction.
我已经将 TFS（2010 年之前）用于 CI，发现它的 CI 部分绝对是一场灾难。
只要您仅执行最基本的操作（获取、编译），TFS 就可以很好地工作，但是一旦您需要部署、运行测试、更新数据库、复制文件等，它就会崩溃很糟糕。我不得不编写奇怪的未记录的 XML 配置文件以及大量的 hack 和变通方法才能使其正常工作。此外，这些部分的文档也不存在。避免。
I have used TFS (pre-2010) for CI and found the CI part of it to be an absolute disaster.
TFS works pretty well as long as you only do the most basic stuff possible (fetch, compile), but as soon as you need to deploy, run tests, update database, copy files etc, it breaks down badly. I had to resort to writing weird undocumented XML config files and lots of hacks and work arounds to get it working. Also, documentation for these parts are non-existing. Avoid.
我发现 TeamCity 非常易于安装和配置，而且功能也非常强大。如果您认为需要可扩展性，TeamCity 可能是一个不错的选择。
I've found TeamCity to be very easy to install and configure, but it is also immensely powerful. If you think you'll need scalability, TeamCity may be a good choice.
TFS 可以满足您所需的一切，并且设置和使用 CI 相对简单。人们面临的主要问题是许可证，但如果您已经拥有许可证/这不是问题，那么 TFS 就不会有任何问题。
TFS does everything you need, and is relatively straightforward to set up and get going with CI. The main issue people have is licencing, but if you already have licences/that's not an issue, you shouldn't have any problems with TFS.
您可能希望将我们的 Parabuild 添加到您的列表中。它是一个商业持续集成服务器。 Parabuild 对小型团队免费。全面披露：我是 Parabuild 制造商 Viewtier Systems 的核心开发人员。
You might want to add our Parabuild to your list. It is a commercial Continuous Integration server. Parabuild is free for small teams. Full disclosure: I am a core developer at Viewtier Systems, makers of Parabuild.
我建议你看看 Hudson，我发现它非常适合构建各种东西。我们用它来重新打包上游 debian 包、C++ 内部工具、Ruby 应用程序，当然还有 Java 应用程序。
它与许多流行的其他工具、版本控制系统、浏览器、问题跟踪器、极端反馈设备等集成。它允许通过添加从属服务器来水平扩展以增加吞吐量。
在 Web 界面中创建新工作非常容易。
强烈推荐。
I would recommend you look at Hudson which I find excellent for building all kinds of stuff. We use it for repackaging upstream debian packages, C++ internal tools, Ruby apps and of course Java apps.
It integrates with a lot of popular other tools, version control systems, browsers, issue trackers, extreme feedback devices, etc... It allows to scale horizontally by adding slave servers to increase throughput.
Creating new jobs is very easy in the Web Interface.
Highly recommended.
我在多个工作中使用 TeamCity 作为持续集成服务器。 TeamCity 与 Eclipse 的集成非常好，可以防止大型团队出现大量停机时间。
I've used TeamCity at several jobs as a Continuous Integration server. The TeamCity integration for Eclipse is very good and prevents a lot of downtime with larger teams.
您可以在持续集成工具目录中找到 CI 工具（开源和商业）的列表
You can find a list of CI tools, both open source and commercial, in the Continuous Integration Tools Directory