Plastic SCM vs. Salt Project

Plastic SCM is well suited for the distributed development environment, where branching and merging can easily be handled. Its a good tool for version controlling, especially for a big team which is contributing to a big project simultaneously. Situation where Plastic SCM is not at all well suited are : If the project is smaller one and need to be handled by couple of people. So in that case setting up Plastic SCM and educating people to work on it is not at all efficient

Managing heterogeneous environments of large numbers of nodes, especially nodes which may need sudden changes (security updates, for instance), or frequent replacement, is a strength for Saltstack. Simplicity is not a strength for Saltstack. In a homogenous environment (all CentOS 7, for example, with no Debian or Windows) I might recommend using Ansible instead - it is less flexible and granular, but simpler to configure.

Incentivized

• Version Control
• Organizing Workflow
• Transparency

Incentivized

• A superb remote execution framework! SaltStack allows us to easily program numerous functions on top of it. For example, we developed a fast parallel asynchronous deployment tool that handles all software deployment, including interdependent service management.
• Configuration management is now easy. We take advantage of this to automate (in tandem with AWS tools) the stand-up of all servers and services. It is also relatively easy to create new configuration management states for software not yet supported by the community (e.g. Grafana).
• Flexibility. Numerous small utilities have been built which simply wrap around SaltStack to allow tedious tasks to become easy.

Incentivized

• Interface
• Documentation
• Learning curve
• Unity integration

Incentivized

• Managing network hardware should be more native and easy
• SaltStack should buffer jobs and, when a client returns, make sure it is executed proberly
• SaltStack should provide basic pillar and states structures to help get newbies started

Incentivized

We haven't had to spend a lot of time talking to support, and we've only had one issue, which, when dealing with other vendors is actually not that bad of an experience.

Plastic has best integration with unity - zero issues, native, straightforward. GitHub feels more stable but for smaller and or indie teams plastic s version control feels much more under control - you click, you feel safe. moreover, there is no need for extra tools such as gitkraken, gitlab, Sourcetree, fork, etc. it is really easy to develop games this way.

Incentivized

I've used shell scripts over ssh, custom in-house deployment tools, Chef, and SaltStack. I've evaluated Ansible, but I was never happy with performance over SSH. Chef's loose configuration data model and lack of philosophy and conventions around use makes it difficult for a team to share responsibility for configuration code. Needing to use additional tools to do orchestration for cross-host/agent dependency relationships made me look for more. SaltStack, while not as mature when I first tried it, impressed me with its speed and elegant design

Incentivized

• Easy to use
• Cheap
• Better than git for us
• Artists love it

Incentivized

• SaltStack has reduced the time it takes to deploy new machines for us 10-fold.
• It is much easier for us to maintain compliance with industry standards with SaltStack.
• No negative impacts!

Incentivized