Apache Maven vs. Azure Pipelines

Building and automating packaging of software can be a challenging task. As the complexity of the project grows so do the dependencies on third-party artifacts. Using Maven we can define and manage the project structure centrally and it helps improve overall build times.

Incentivized

With a fully Microsoft Azure based workflow - Azure Pipelines makes absolute sense. Azure Pipelines are robust and work very well with SonarQube for test coverage and are shared with our developers. This prevents the developers for pushing code without unit tests across our backend and frontend platforms. We have reduced our instances of manual regression tests especially when there are multiple teams working across the same repositories.

Incentivized

• Makes the build process simple and easy to do.
• It provides a standard build system that can be adopted by multiple, different groups within an organization.
• It's extensible with easy to use custom extensions which our developers take full advantage of.

Incentivized

• Code Integration/Code Deployment
• Azure Engine Auto Scaling Up with help of Pipeline
• Managing Version Control and deploy in rollback with just one click

Incentivized

• One of the issues with building software using Apache Maven is that its cache resolution is not optimal. It pulls down all the artifacts onto the developer's local machine and can sometimes result in conflicts.
• The build process can vary in time and gets progressively longer as the project's complexity increases.

Incentivized

• Error messaging when team members don't have permissions

Incentivized

The overall usability of Apache Maven is very good to us. We were able to incorporate it into our company's build process pretty quickly. We deployed it to multiple teams throughout the entire enterprise. We got good feedback from our developers stating that Apache Maven has simplified their build process. It also allowed to to standardize the build process for the entire enterprise, thus ensure that each development team is using the same, consistent process to build code.

Incentivized

I can't speak to the support, as I've never had issues. Apache Maven "just works," and errors were user errors or local nexus errors. Apache Maven is a great build/dependency management tool. I give it a 9/10 because occasionally the error message don't immediately indicate a solution...but again, those errors were always user or configuration errors, and the Maven documentation is extensive, so I don't find fault in Maven, but in its users.

Incentivized

Ant is useful if your build is heavily based on customs scripts running in the right order. Maven greatly simplifies the process to keep track of and download build dependencies compared with Apache Ant. If your build is based on multiple custom scripts running in a specific order there is a lot of overhead in Maven compared to Apache Ant.

Incentivized

We have used the GitHub CI/CD. Earlier we were using the Azure Pipelines but after GitHub had their actions, we integrated that for CI/CD. It runs the tests and makes a production build which can be live. GitHub CI/CD is more useful because we have to make script only once then just by few changes we can deploy it onto Azure, AWS, Google anywhere so we found it more convenient

Incentivized

• Maven has been the only tool for building Java apps for a long time. And it being open source has helped maximize ROI.
• I can't think of any negative. With Gradle coming up as a newer and better technology for building, some teams are shifting towards it.

Incentivized

• We don't have to deploy changes manually
• But because of this that we automated some tasks, we need to be still aware of some edge cases we can meet and which can cause a pipelines failures
• We can deploy changes pretty fast

Incentivized