Apache Maven vs. HashiCorp Packer

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
HashiCorp Packer
Score 10.0 out of 10
N/A
HashiCorp Packer automates the creation of machine images, coming out of the box with support to build images for Amazon EC2, CloudStack, DigitalOcean, Docker, Google Compute Engine, Microsoft Azure, QEMU, VirtualBox, and VMware.N/A
Pricing
Apache MavenHashiCorp Packer
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache MavenHashiCorp Packer
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache MavenHashiCorp Packer
Considered Both Products
Apache Maven
Chose Apache Maven
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 …
Chose Apache Maven
We evaluated many options to automate our build process including Apache Maven, Jenkins, Octopus Deploy and Azure DevOps Server. We found Apache Maven to be the easiest to use by far. We like the ability to customize our build process for individual departments. Apache Maven …
Chose Apache Maven
If there are competitor products out there, I've never heard of them. This is the solution for Java dependency management. From my experience, the alternative is "no solution, create your own."
Chose Apache Maven
Maven was chosen out of convention as a static build tool. Personally, I prefer Gradle's less verbose syntax and modularity. Same with Bazel and Sbt.
Chose Apache Maven
Integration with Java IDEs is fast and easy. It automatically fetches and resolves dependencies. It is a specification built tool.
Chose Apache Maven
Maven vs Gradle

  • Maven is much more mature vs Gradle and been around for a long time. Easy to get developers. Gradle is new but adoption is fast
Chose Apache Maven
Ant, Maven's opposing framework, is often a point of comparison. Although Ant does not require formal conventions, it is procedural in the sense that you must tell Ant exactly what to do and when. It also lacks a lifecycle, along with goal definition and dependencies. Maven, on …
Chose Apache Maven
It has a project object module and pre-defined structure that is better than Make and running Ant scripts for builds. There is fairly good support from the online open source community. Documentation from Apache is also very good.
HashiCorp Packer
Chose HashiCorp Packer
There are lot of tools in market which does the job for Image creation but all of them are not complete Machine/Image as a code. All other alternatives can create Image partially.

Main reason for selecting Packer are
Best Alternatives
Apache MavenHashiCorp Packer
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 MavenHashiCorp Packer
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.1
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache MavenHashiCorp Packer
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
We use packer to generate new machine images for multiple platforms on every change to our Configuration Management tools like Chef/Puppet/Ansible It's act single tool for Image building for Multi-provider like AWS/Azure/GCP Helps to achieve Dev/Prod Parity Packer itself doesn't have a state like Terraform. You can't do packer output AMI ID. If you have a scenario where you want to maintain the state for images it would be tough to manage via Packer.
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
  • Multi-provider portability
  • Greater testability
  • Super fast infrastructure deployment
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
  • Manageability
  • Manageability
  • Manageability
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
We are happy with the use of Packer in our organization. Apart from manageability, I don't find any other drawback with Packer.
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
It's best for building Image with many features and benefits.
Read full review
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
I only once required support and it was very smooth.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
No answers on this topic
I haven't found any issue in Implementation that itself describes how well this tool is built.
Read full review
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
There are lot of tools in market which does the job for Image creation but all of them are not complete Machine/Image as a code. All other alternatives can create Image partially. Main reason for selecting Packer are Packer is lightweight, portable, and command-line driven Packer helps keep development, staging, and production as similar as possible. Packer automates the creation of any type of machine image Multi-provider portability is the feature to die for
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
  • Super fast infrastructure deployment
  • Quick turnaround of infrastructure in multiple cloud using single tool.
  • Increase productivity by reducing time in infrastructure building.
Read full review
ScreenShots