AWS CodeBuild vs. Azure Pipelines

It is really good for building projects in the cloud. If you try to do build the project first locally and then push that stack to the cloud it could take a lot of time. In this way, it also consumes a lot of resources in the computer and in the network.

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

• Customization
• Do code builds within a schedule or when the source code changes
• Only pay for the build time used

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

• It was difficult to create a branching strategy with GitHub. We had everything running from main, but in a true devops environment, we would like to incorporate a true branching strategy.
• I would like to share build projects with each AWS account we utilize versus creating a build project in each account. It will allow us consistent deployments across the board.
• The error logs are natively in AWS, but when developers do not have access, there is no way for them to view error logs for maintenance other than an admin who has access to share the error logs.

Incentivized

• Error messaging when team members don't have permissions

Incentivized

It is a highly usable, well integrated CI/CD service, patricularly for AWS-centric organizations. It is a strong balance between simplicity and flexibility. Security was integrated with AWS Secrets Manager allowing secrets to be retrieved dynamically - a huge usability win for us. I did not enjoy the manual build for each environment

Incentivized

I've used GitHub Actions compared to AWS CodeBuild - I enjoyed the integration with AWS from a codebuild perspective, but GitHub Actions and Workflows allowed us to create a reusable pipeline which is more in line with our devops structure. I enjoy AWS CodeBuild, but from a true continuous deployment, GitHub Actions was more fit.

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

• AWS CodeBuild was introduces as a core enabler for automating database deployments and enforcing a standardization across six environments. The standardization and quality control was well received.
• Security was baked in reducing audit findings.
• Deployments took minutes to update all environments compared to hours. It helped us a lot to reduce drift and deploy consistently.

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