Avis clients sur CircleCI

One of the market leaders. You can bet it is going to be here for at least next few years and your one off implementation and deployment of this service will do for long time without ay significant change and it will serve you reliably.

For some not_totaly_standartd deployments or integrations it is (as many similar products) a bit tricky. But thanks to the huge community you can find some solution for pretty much everything quite quickly.

Responsive support, much faster builds now I can easily parallelize things with Workflows 2.0.

Very easily integrated with GitHub and other code-quality services.

Able to build in macOS if necessary.

I would like the ability to specify resources available to a machine, fine to charge more for this feature.

I would like to use Workflows 2.0 with macOS builds.

It would also be great to be able to specify which docker images are cached on all executors, fine to charge more for this feature.

It's relatively simple to get started. I like that you can pick between Docker and VMs. It integrates with GitHub nicely.

The Docker in Docker paradigm doesn't work for us since we use containers. We end up using VMs anyways. I think the configuration language is not that great to use and can quickly get unwieldy for larger CI workflows (especially when repeating jobs with different parameters).

There are also outages at least once a quarter.

- Is integrated with several tools like slack
- Configure a project is simple and quick, and most of the cases once you have done this, you will not need to log in into the platform. You will have build going in a couple of hours.
- I have it running in several project and works really well.

- Pricing could be a little bit better I guess or have a better free plan for beginners, I don't think any cons of using CircleCI actually.

Sine the release of circleci v2.0 using containers as the main advantage using circle has become much simpler and powerfull. Their integration with IOs its a powerup in front of other CI/CD platforms

The ui really needs to cleanup a bit, make it simpler. Also their need to provide more integrations with third party tools

The simplicity of configuration is unparalleled. We use CI on new projects day one. The ease of use, and setup, is definitely what keeps us coming back.

Lack of tools for multi project repos. We would love to keep our front and back-end code together in one repo while splitting the CI for them. So, it'd be great if we could run two builds separately based on the same repo.

Has helped up to totally streamline our development and testing workflow. Each service has it's own pipeline. The management interface and docker integration have made the setup and monitoring process super simple.

Super easy configuration and initial setup. Powerful features like running steps of build/testing process in parallel. CircleCI is our teams core safety net for catching bugs and deploying safely, often.

Not a lot to dislike. Sometimes the interface changes and buttons that you used to expect to be there (like the one for rebuild with out cache) disappear. Hopefully there will be fewer of these unexpected changes as 2.0 becomes more mature.

Great UI, easy to setup, easy to manage. All integrations "just work", we use Slack notifications, webhooks for triggering build, and even those sweet browser notifications when we need to make sure that the build is successful. Impressive Docker support.

Circle 2.0 offers improved customizability, added more features, but for small and simple projects it's not as easy to setup anymore.

Simplicity of use, integrations and features make CircleCI one of the best CI systems in existence

Pricing goes really high when you need to do some custom solution, like have self-hosted runners

The codability of CircleCI makes it very useful as we can checkout the `circleci/config.yaml` in our VCS and peer review is possible.

While YAML code is convenient and preferable by many developers, it's good to have a GUI based pipeline tool where we can drag and drop steps and jobs.

It is incredibly easy to get started, you can be integrated in hours and from then on its a consistent reliable platform for all your CI needs.

As test suites grow and parallelization becomes important it can get awfully expensive. I still use it on every project but I was at a prior company where we racked up bills in the thousands a month without really trying for not that big a product. This was definitely due to some poor planning but CircleCI makes it easy to land yourself in that kind of situation if you're not careful.

CircleCI is highly configurable for many different types of workflows. We rely on CircleCI for continuous deployment. Our tests automatically run and deploy code to the correct environment depending on the branch it's pushed to. It's also generally reliable these days. Reliability was an issue for us a few years ago but those issues are mostly gone now.

Since CircleCI is highly configurable it can also be difficult to build out a custom flow that works the way you need it to. We spent more time than we wanted to getting our automated deployment system set up.

-Docker support is great when using container based builds
-Competitive pricing and free tier
-Snappy / Responsive UI

-2.0 is missing features in 1.0
-Poor slack notification support
-yml format is strange. More complex commands can be very ugly

Easy to manage pipelines and deployment to multiple servers and to manage versions from GitHub. Easy to restart pipelines or particular deployments.

New UI feels less intuitive than the old one, but does work well. Sometimes errors can be hard to track down, but think that may be our configuration / setup rather than CircleCI itself.

I am using CircleCI within many projects and I like it - its feature-rich, supports every usecase we need and from my perspective is absolutely sufficient as CI/CD tool for projects I was working on. It also has free plan which could be enough for smaller teams or projects.

Not very often, but still, sometimes an inexplicable black magic happens and it requires a bit of debugging and reconfiguring of the project or the CircleCI.

Circle CI is a very nice CI tools, especially if you need to build on Apple devices

It's a bit pricy regarding other service that can be opensource

It let's you automate continuos integration fairly easy by just using a YML file. You can setup many different stages and rules for these stages to have different development environments. It's fairly easy to learn and implement. It integrates very well with Github.

Have seen a few downtimes in the last couple of months.

This is my first experience using a CI software tool, and it's AMAZING. Tools that automate the workflow of code deployment gives a lot of

Not too much of a problem, but there's somewhat of a learning curve to set up your environment. Took me a few days to educate myself in the specifics, such as caching, jobs, workers etc.

- Workflows is great tool for enabling parallel tasks
- deep customization for cache controls
- easily introduced deploy workflows

- config file tends to get verbose and too long ( I want to have some ways to separate concerns among some jobs)

It's an excellent unobtrusive CI that keeps developers writing software rather than waiting for tests to finish. It can quickly run through thousands of tests and send alerts once complete. The UI is great and easy to use.

The config is probably the worst of the cloud CI software.

Multi-architecture builds, full Docker support, and streamlined declarative pipeline config made me feel right at home!

Could use a better comparative analysis marketing doc to explain differences from folks coming from Travis-CI to better understand the advantages.

Support for OSX environment and Docker platform, very fast builds, advanced cache, up to date software. Web UI is not so bad, but i love the simplicity and configuration possibilities, that eg. Semaphore CI provides