问题描述
我认为标题总结了这一点.我只是想知道为什么其中一个更适合 Svn 的 Java 项目的持续集成构建.
作为一个长期的 CruiseControl 提交者和一个从未使用过 Hudson 的人,我很偏颇,但我的看法是:
Hudson 更容易启动和运行(很大程度上来自一个漂亮的网络界面),并且拥有一个非常活跃的插件开发社区.
CruiseControl 得到了许多 第三方资料 的支持,并具有以下优势使用 xml 配置做一些巧妙的技巧,例如插件预配置和 include.projects,它可以让您使用项目对配置信息进行版本控制.
如果您只打算进行一些构建,我认为 Hudson 是明显的赢家.如果你有很多——而且不介意 xml——那么我认为 CruiseControl 的 xml 配置技巧会成为一种真正的优势.
I think the title sums it up. I just want to know why one or the other is better for continous integration builds of Java projects from Svn.
As a long time CruiseControl committer and someone who has never used Hudson I'm pretty biased, but my take on it is:
Hudson is much easier to get up and running (in large part from a nice web interface) and has a very active plugin development community.
CruiseControl has support from lots of 3rd party stuff and has the benefit of doing some neat tricks with the xml configuration like plugin preconfiguration and include.projects which lets you version the configuration information with the project.
If you're only going to have a few builds I think Hudson is the clear winner. If you're going to have lots -- and don't mind the xml -- then I think CruiseControl's xml configuration tricks become a real strength.
这篇关于用于 Java 项目的 Hudson 和 CruiseControl 有什么区别?的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持跟版网!


大气响应式网络建站服务公司织梦模板
高端大气html5设计公司网站源码
织梦dede网页模板下载素材销售下载站平台(带会员中心带筛选)
财税代理公司注册代理记账网站织梦模板(带手机端)
成人高考自考在职研究生教育机构网站源码(带手机端)
高端HTML5响应式企业集团通用类网站织梦模板(自适应手机端)