Azure Pipelines vs. TeamCity

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

TeamCity is well suited for an organization using continuous integration, meaning you release code to production often, and an agile project management system. There are free versions available for small teams and enterprise versions available for large teams with many different builds. TeamCity is probably overkill for basic e-commerce or blog website builds that do not require much development after the initial launch

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

• Fully customizable build process. Each step of the build process can be parameterized and customized to address specific needs of particular applications. This allowed us to easily convert from a custom VM-based environment to our current Docker-based environment.
• Manages large numbers of build agents seamlessly. This allows us to run multiple builds on many different applications in a most efficient manner.
• Build steps can be managed in an arbitrary manner, allowing some parts of the process to proceed in parallel while restricting others to depend on completion of all relevant steps.

Incentivized

• Error messaging when team members don't have permissions

Incentivized

• It is not plug and play thing
• Need more specific configurations for smaller projects as well
• Online help is less available
• Basic implementation is easy but I think feature add on can be complex as it involve some language knowledge as well.

Incentivized

TeamCity runs really well, even when sharing a small instance with other applications. The user interface adequately conveys important information without being overly bloated, and it is snappy. There isn't any significant overhead to build agents or unit test runners that we have measured.

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

Jenkins relies on being open source as the primary driver for its success. This low cost is a huge factor for many companies, both small and large. The professional, free tier of TeamCity offers a huge amount of growth before ever needing to pay anything. I personally also find the user experience of TeamCity to be much better, both from a look and feel, as well as from an out-of-the-box feature set perspective. The big selling feature of ADO is its native integration with Azure. TeamCity integrates very well with out-of-the-box .NET support and greatly simplifies our use of another diverse tooling outside of the Microsoft ecosystem.

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

• TeamCity was a key contributor to our organization's adoption of Agile.
• TeamCity made it possible to KILL "It works on my laptop" conversations with Developers. If it does not compile in TeamCity - the project is not deployable. TeamCity's easy to use interface made it possible to quickly adopt a "Deploy Only from TeamCity" policy, further ensuring TeamCity Builds were the gold-standard for well-configured source code.

Incentivized