Re: Best CI Server for Git?

> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 7:42 PM, Matt Graham <mdg149@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hudson leaves a fair amount to be implemented by plug-ins, so not
>> being installed out of the box doesn't really imply bad.  I would say
>> that there are more significant differences between Hudson and Cruise
>> Control than how they integrate with Git.
>
> Makes sense.
>
>> We are currently switching from Cruise Control to Hudson for reasons
>> related to ease of use.
>
> Would you mind being a little more specific?  The basics of what I've
> heard is that Cruise Control is ultimately much more flexible and
> capable, but that Hudson beats it hands down regarding usability and
> UI.  What specific issues had your team come up against?
>
>> Here is another hudson/git plugin.  It may not be quite as official
>> but addresses issues people have had with the more official one:
>> http://github.com/stephenh/hudson-git2
>
> I remember when this was announced.  Unfortunately, I can't find a
> clear comparison of the two.  I heard in a recent thread on here that
> at least some of the problems being answered by hudson-git2 have been
> cleaned up in the latest version of the official plug-in.  Is it still
> the case that there are problems in the official one that are fixed in
> Stephen's?
>
> Thanks so much for your help! :)
>
> --
>
> In Christ,
>
> Timmy V.
>
> http://burningones.com/
> http://five.sentenc.es/ - Spend less time on e-mail
>