Apache Maven vs. GoCD

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Maven
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
Apache Maven is an open source build automation tool.N/A
GoCD
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
GoCD, from ThoughtWorks in Chicago, is an application lifecycle management and development tool.N/A
Pricing
Apache MavenGoCD
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache MavenGoCD
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache MavenGoCD
Best Alternatives
Apache MavenGoCD
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache MavenGoCD
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache MavenGoCD
Likelihood to Recommend
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.
Read full review
GoCD is easy to set up. So if you just want to get some pipelines up & running quickly, & they're quite stable, or you can have many pipelines for different needs then GoCD is great. Still, if you only want to have a few pipelines, but with the flexibility to run them with different parameters dynamically, then Jenkins is better.
Read full review
Pros
  • 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.
Read full review
  • Pipeline-as-Code works really well. All our pipelines are defined in yml files, which are checked into SCM.
  • The ability to link multiple pipelines together is really cool. Later pipelines can declare a dependency to pick up the build artifacts of earlier ones.
  • Agents definition is really great. We can define multiple different kinds of environments to best suit our diverse build systems.
Read full review
Cons
  • 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.
Read full review
  • UI can be improved
  • Location for settings can be re-arranged
  • API for setting up pipeline
Read full review
Usability
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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.
Read full review
I prefer using GoCD compared to Jenkins. The UI makes sense, I like the simplicity to hit the 'Play' button for a straightforward deployment of the 'Play +' if you need to override some settings when deploying whereas Jenkins, you have the whole page for each pipeline. The environment makes sense but can often confuse the user while GoCD simply has a drop-down to select your environment.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • 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.
Read full review
  • ROI has been good since it's open source
  • Settings.xml need to be backed up periodically. It contains all the settings for your pipelines! We accidentally deleted before and we have to restore and re-create several missing pipelines
  • More straight forward use of API and allows filtering e.g., pull all pipelines triggered after this date
Read full review
ScreenShots