There is limited room for tuning beyond the timeouts, memory, or CPU allocations. Sometimes, we need to take some screenshots of the results. The tool does not provide automated features for evidence collection. We must manually modify them to place them in S3 buckets and configure them.
There could be a possibility of deploying tag-based conditions for different environments using the same code base similar to GitHub. Implementing tag-based conditions in the build spec file is possible, but the process can be simpler. They could provide this tagging functionality in the UI itself. The users could decide pipeline triggers based on the predefined rules.
The setup time is a bit long. We need a lot of experience to work with it. We need a lot of troubleshooting experience. We need to contact support if things get out of hand.
The product could be integrated easily with other platforms, such as GitHub. The migration process from one source code to another needs improvement. It should support different codes and tools.
The solution could improve the documentation. Sometimes we have some issues with the documentation not updating after releasing .NET 6. We had some issues with building the code pipeline, and it was not updating the documentation. It's better to update the code documentation. In a future release, they should improve the UX and add some additional features.
The only area in my opinion that needs to be improved is the time between build and deployment. AWS should improve build time. We wait up to seven minutes for deployment. In the next release, I would like to see fewer timeout errors.
Virtualization and Cloud Architect at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2021-08-18T16:05:27Z
Aug 18, 2021
Since we are very price-conscious, we would like the solution to be cheaper. If it was, we would use it more. CodePipeline is not an option for us at all, as CodePipeline is strictly tied to AWS and we have workloads on Azure and Google. We don't want our workloads to be running from source code that is running in AWS. That's why we prefer on-prem for source code with Terraform and GitHub and then use that to deploy across the cloud. That's our approach.
Build automation tools automate the time-consuming tasks inherent in creating a “build,” or usable version of an application. They automate and orchestrate the sometimes complex processes of compiling computer source code into binary code and packaging that binary code as well as running automated tests
Some PeerSpot members use build automation solutions. In reviews, they offer opinions on the most significant selection factors to consider when looking at this type of software. One theme...
There is limited room for tuning beyond the timeouts, memory, or CPU allocations. Sometimes, we need to take some screenshots of the results. The tool does not provide automated features for evidence collection. We must manually modify them to place them in S3 buckets and configure them.
There could be a possibility of deploying tag-based conditions for different environments using the same code base similar to GitHub. Implementing tag-based conditions in the build spec file is possible, but the process can be simpler. They could provide this tagging functionality in the UI itself. The users could decide pipeline triggers based on the predefined rules.
The setup time is a bit long. We need a lot of experience to work with it. We need a lot of troubleshooting experience. We need to contact support if things get out of hand.
The product could be integrated easily with other platforms, such as GitHub. The migration process from one source code to another needs improvement. It should support different codes and tools.
AWS CodePipeline doesn't offer much room for customization.
The solution could improve the documentation. Sometimes we have some issues with the documentation not updating after releasing .NET 6. We had some issues with building the code pipeline, and it was not updating the documentation. It's better to update the code documentation. In a future release, they should improve the UX and add some additional features.
The only area in my opinion that needs to be improved is the time between build and deployment. AWS should improve build time. We wait up to seven minutes for deployment. In the next release, I would like to see fewer timeout errors.
Since we are very price-conscious, we would like the solution to be cheaper. If it was, we would use it more. CodePipeline is not an option for us at all, as CodePipeline is strictly tied to AWS and we have workloads on Azure and Google. We don't want our workloads to be running from source code that is running in AWS. That's why we prefer on-prem for source code with Terraform and GitHub and then use that to deploy across the cloud. That's our approach.