
Partnering with Microsoft to run Jenkins infrastructure on Azure - dstaheli
https://jenkins.io/blog/2016/05/18/announcing-azure-partnership/
======
api
You could already run Jenkins on Azure just fine. This announces a business
partnership but I don't understand what other implications there are.

It seems to me that the big three cloud providers are trying very hard to
decommoditize themselves by becoming semi-proprietary platforms. In some
cases, such as AWS databases or Microsoft's machine learning APIs, there is a
lot of reality there. But in most other cases it's not terribly hard to
achieve the same thing with open software on commodity cloud servers.

------
stonewhite
Good news! Azure CDN integration for plugins will hopefully solve plugin
repository outages that result in half-updates and pulled-out hair.

------
thinkpad20
Anyone else trying to read this on mobile? The text is tiny and zooming in
causes the side divs to expand and cover the main text. :(

~~~
AndrewDucker
Firefox mobile's reading mode worked perfectly for me.

------
mrmondo
/vent I don't see what's interesting or really even positively relevant here
in 2016. Jenkins was a very important part of what accelerated the early
progression on high performance product delivery, but it's not exactly
something to aspire to run, nor is it in any way a measure or sign of
technological advance to be able or even suitable to run the application. I
don't think any level of integration would make this favourable solution. One
of Microsofts weaknesses that has only really recently become blatantly
obvious publicly is their poor ability to integrate. Having a monopoly on file
formats and the such got them a huge wave to ride but they are more of a
holdings company stumbling than anything. Their offerings are less than nimble
and news like this in 2016 only exists because they're reaching for any public
opportunities to make themselves appear relevant. Just look at O365,
SharePoint Online etc... They're truly awful to use if required to do so on a
regular basis, the sheer latency of those product interfaces alone should be
enough to make anyone weary but when you start digging into their network and
see how broken their infrastructure is, is damn right scary. They fail to
provide reliable network routes, have widespread internal DNS issues and data
replication mismatches. Ending my rant here but it damn cheeses me when people
fall for the flashy brochure - it's their job to take your money, that is the
mission - they don't care about you. /vent

*edit: spelling, I'm half asleep

~~~
anewhnaccount
I just installed Jenkins 2 today and in my opinion, while it still has a way
to go to meet the ease of use of best of the various SaaS options now
available, it has improved leaps and bounds.

~~~
phunge
Which are the best of the SaaS options? Just curious -- I'm not happy with
CircleCI or Travis right now.

~~~
Klathmon
If you don't mind me asking, what are your biggest complaints with Circle or
Travis?

My work might be looking for a CI provider and those 2 are the first ones that
come to mind.

~~~
phunge
I actually like Travis quite a lot except for one issue! At work we use docker
for builds, and neither tool can build docker images in such a way that the
docker layer cache is utilized. For more details: [https://github.com/travis-
ci/travis-ci/issues/5358](https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/5358),
[https://circleci.com/docs/docker/#caching-docker-
layers](https://circleci.com/docs/docker/#caching-docker-layers),
[https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/20316](https://github.com/docker/docker/issues/20316).

This makes our CI builds painfully slow. It's not entirely CircleCI or
Travis's fault, it's the interaction between them and docker.

