Bamboo vs Hudson ?

0 0 ?? 0

Recently on Answers.Atlassian.com someone posted the question “What value addition does Bamboo provides for automation testers over Hudson/Jenkins?” : at this thread https://answers.atlassian.com/questions/36248/what-value-addition-does-bamboo-provides-for-automation-testers-over-hudson-jenkins?page=1

Here’s the high-level summary I provided based on a quick analysis I recently did between the two tools.

Bamboo is part of the Atlassian tool suite and as such provides great cross-app linkage using “App Links”.

See “Integrating Bamboo with Jira”  : http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/BAMBOO/Integrating+Bamboo+with+JIRA

Jira App Links : http://confluence.atlassian.com/display/JIRA044/Configuring+Application+Links

One use is to use App Links and Gadgets to display Bamboo build metrics on a COnfluence page, or on a Jira Dashboard. You can link Builds in Bamboo to Code Reviews in Fisheye/Crucible or to Issues in Jira. This inter-application linking is a big selling point for the Atlassian tool suite and a big plus for Bamboo.

However, Hudson DOES have plugin to allow it to integrate with JIRA, COnfluence, Crowd, and Bamboo.

Both Bamboo and Hudson are relatively similar.

They both offer the following concepts (though the terminology varies in each tool) :

 - Local and Remote Build Agents
 - Support for Amazon EC2 remote build agents
 - Ability to build multiple languages (Java, PHP, MS, etc.)
 - Ability to use Ant, Maven, Make, command-line builds, etc.
 - Ability to define parent/child relationships for projects.
 - Ability to Collect, Manage, Publish Artifacts
 - Ability for project-owner to specify SCM credentials
 - Ability to track each build’s success/failure
 - Flexible build scheduling (cron, SCM polling, etc)
 - Basic build time/duration reports
 - Flexible email notifications of build failure/success
 - User/Group security model for projects.

Features of Bamboo that Outshine Hudson :

 - Bamboo has a more sophisticated and pretty user interface.
 - Bamboo supports better parallelization of builds out of the box without a developer needing to know how to do it (though Hudson can accomplish roughly the same paralellization with additional effort and config).
 - Bamboo has a bit better user interface for interacting with and managing remote build agents, defining executables/capaiblitieson the build agents, etc.

Features of Hudson that Outshine Bamboo:

 - Hudson has significantly more plugins to extend functionality
 - Hudson has a significantly more active developer community
 - Hudson can have a slightly easier learning curve for users who have never used a continuous integration server.
 - Hudson supports more SCM repositories than Bmaboo, specifically Serena, Synergy, MS Sourcesafe, StarTeam, and MS Team Foundation Server.

There are also lots of CT solutions out there. Here is a large comparison performed on many CT tools such as Bamboo, Hudson/Jenkins, Continuum, CruiseControl, Electric Commander, TeamCity, etc. : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Continuous_Integration_Software

anyone have any additional feedback or comments?