Live data from Hacker News

Blue Ocean

jenkins.io

21–30 of 185 posts

Re: Blue Ocean

#21
post #20
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO moving from Travis to Jenkins seems like a very disruptive change. As for me, I had used Travis just a bit, and same for Jenkins, and didn't like any of those options very much. So when my team needed to setup a CI solution, we ended up using GitLab CI, and it brings the best of both worlds: - Free service version if you use the GitLab.com deployment (granted, gitlab.com is a bit slow because it's the new thing a…

I'll definitely check it out - but the problem with many of these tools is a lack of "proper" Docker support, along with the ability to self host and debug. Thanks for the heads up!

GitLab CI has proper Docker support. You can set a default docker image for each runner `--docker-image ruby:2.1` or set one for the project in the .gitlab-ci.yml file. For more information see https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/ci/docker/using_docker_images.htm...

Did you know GitLab also comes with a private container registry? https://about.gitlab.com/2016/05/23/gitlab-container-registr...

Re: Blue Ocean

#22
post #19
post #16

Seeing how much people recommend other solutions, I've actually moved from Travis to Jenkins, and never looked back. Yes, Jenkins has its issues (crappy UX, poor/awkward docs), but where it shines is the fact it's self-hosted, so I can SSH onto the instance to debug a failing build or replay it with a modified Jenkinsfile on the fly. I'm quite proud of the current setup we have; We're hosting our app with Google's Co…

IMO moving from Travis to Jenkins seems like a very disruptive change. As for me, I had used Travis just a bit, and same for Jenkins, and didn't like any of those options very much. So when my team needed to setup a CI solution, we ended up using GitLab CI, and it brings the best of both worlds: - Free service version if you use the GitLab.com deployment (granted, gitlab.com is a bit slow because it's the new thing a…

Thanks for your kind words about GitLab. We're working hard on making GitLab.com faster, see https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitaly/issues/ for the latest. A workaround would be to run your own GitLab installations, all the CI features are in the open source GitLab CE https://about.gitlab.com/products/#comparison

For an intro to Gitlab CI see https://about.gitlab.com/gitlab-ci/

Re: Blue Ocean

#23
post #21
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll definitely check it out - but the problem with many of these tools is a lack of "proper" Docker support, along with the ability to self host and debug. Thanks for the heads up!

GitLab CI has proper Docker support. You can set a default docker image for each runner `--docker-image ruby:2.1` or set one for the project in the .gitlab-ci.yml file. For more information see https://docs.gitlab.com/ce/ci/docker/using_docker_images.htm... Did you know GitLab also comes with a private container registry? https://about.gitlab.com/2016/05/23/gitlab-container-registr...

Thanks for clarification - I'll definitely have a look :)

Re: Blue Ocean

#24
We used Jenkinsfiles and pipelines recently. And also introduce Blue Ocean on our jenkins server.

It come with a few glitches: Some plugins are not compatible with Blue Ocean, causing a white-page-of-death. However I found there where already issues created for them, i just turned off the plugin.

But the biggest downer, is that blue ocean is just a small UI on viewing pipelines. Its not a replacement for jenkins. And you still need the normal jenkins UI. Which doesn't handle pipelines well.

I think its still very much a beta project.

Re: Blue Ocean

#25
post #19
post #16

Seeing how much people recommend other solutions, I've actually moved from Travis to Jenkins, and never looked back. Yes, Jenkins has its issues (crappy UX, poor/awkward docs), but where it shines is the fact it's self-hosted, so I can SSH onto the instance to debug a failing build or replay it with a modified Jenkinsfile on the fly. I'm quite proud of the current setup we have; We're hosting our app with Google's Co…

IMO moving from Travis to Jenkins seems like a very disruptive change. As for me, I had used Travis just a bit, and same for Jenkins, and didn't like any of those options very much. So when my team needed to setup a CI solution, we ended up using GitLab CI, and it brings the best of both worlds: - Free service version if you use the GitLab.com deployment (granted, gitlab.com is a bit slow because it's the new thing a…

Honestly my experience is that SaaS / hosted CI is just generally annoying due to constant stability and performance (both transient and in general, eg. caching in Travis) issues.

Self-hosted CI on the other hand requires a lot of resources, especially when you're not only testing Linux or BSD, but proprietary OSes (OSX, Windows, although the latter at least has the Edge images that work everywhere).

Ultimately I feel like the use of CI in many open source projects isn't very high due to constant annoyances and difficulty debugging the CI environment.

Re: Blue Ocean

#27
post #6

I like blue ocean - but wouldn't moving to something like Concourse CI or GOCD be a better idea in the end?

We currently have a Jenkins setup and recently looked into both Concourse CI and GoCD as candidates for a change.

We decided not go with Concourse, because it has a complex setup with bosh. Not much other use cases are really covered in the docs other than a simple one machine setup so you are left to figure things out on your own (don't really have the time to go into all that, jenkins + ec2 plugin is very simple and just works). Also the minimal GUI, very CLI-centric. this is more of a particular thing, since I don't think that our current team will be comfortable with that UX and we have to weight this in.

We did like the docker-centric approach and specially the postgres backend that makes for a much more flexible maintenance story.

We decided not to go with GoCD simply because it feels very similar to jenkins in several aspects, but all concepts and workflow are different so we would have to relearn all that we do in jenkins in the GoCD way. Also redo all ops involved in backup, update etc. I just didn't find the killer feature to justify going through it. The postgres backend would maybe have caught my attention if it wasn't offered as an add-on for the expensive paid version.

In the end just decided to leverage more of Jenkins 2.x pipelines with shared libs instead of having independently configured jobs that are bothersome to maintain. Will probably make some changes to our agents to leverage more of docker instead of messing with AMIs.

Another major factor is the size of community, which alleviates a lot of worries.

As for Blue Ocean, I hope it evolves in the right direction, but right now it simply does not solve any problems for us. As said somewhere else, you can't build a pipeline with parameters. This is really a show stopper, parameterized builds are central to a lot jenkins use cases. Another problem is a single view for all jobs but no filter? The favorite jobs feature does not substitute either search or the view and folder way.

Re: Blue Ocean

#28
post #6

I like blue ocean - but wouldn't moving to something like Concourse CI or GOCD be a better idea in the end?

We currently have a Jenkins setup and recently looked into both Concourse CI and GoCD as candidates for a change. We decided not go with Concourse, because it has a complex setup with bosh. Not much other use cases are really covered in the docs other than a simple one machine setup so you are left to figure things out on your own (don't really have the time to go into all that, jenkins + ec2 plugin is very simple an…

> We decided not go with Concourse, because it has a complex setup with bosh

Uh.... I've set up Concourse in 30min from scratch without BOSH :/

Re: Blue Ocean

#29
I've given up on Jenkins and switched to Travis. The overhead of managing a good Jenkins setup for a small team is not worth the effort.

Re: Blue Ocean

#30
post #5

I just want to mention that I loved the idea of BlueOcean at the begining. It looks sleak an works well with pipeline. However, for us it's unusable in production setting. I know that it's still in beta, but as one example it doesn't support parameters. When user starts a job through BlueOcean it will fail.(Officialy they don't plan to implement it any time soon as I found out) That means It stays disabled in our jen…

Actually, we're working on parameters and input right now! It's likely that both parameterised job and Pipeline input will land in a beta release mid-Jan.

You can watch and follow along on https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-38805 and https://issues.jenkins-ci.org/browse/JENKINS-38494.

Post reply on HN