CircleCI Reviews

Responsive support, much faster builds now I can easily parallelize things with Workflows 2.0. Very easily integrated with GitHub and other code-quality services. Able to build in macOS if necessary.

I would like the ability to specify resources available to a machine, fine to charge more for this feature. I would like to use Workflows 2.0 with macOS builds. It would also be great to be able to specify which docker images are cached on all executors, fine to charge more for this feature.

- Easy to understand yaml config format - Integration with GitHub - Workflows for powerful deployment and release strategies - Good community support

- I am not the biggest fan of the recent UI update. If the "expand" toggle is set to true, everything jumps resulting in me clicking things unintentionally. - Many of us have workflows that we do not use on every push (e.g. deploying to testing). With the next UI changes, the UI has a timer column which is always updating, why??? - Why can't I select a default project? When I now browse to circleci, I always have to select a project. Most developers only ever work on one project at a time, let us choose one!

The UI and integration is easy and very straight forward. Were able to get builds going in a couple hours.

When picking a CI to use for our business we tried a lot of the big names and CircleCi was great except for the price point for how fast the builds were. Alternatives like Strider gave CircleCi a bad taste.

One of the market leaders. You can bet it is going to be here for at least next few years and your one off implementation and deployment of this service will do for long time without ay significant change and it will serve you reliably.

For some not_totaly_standartd deployments or integrations it is (as many similar products) a bit tricky. But thanks to the huge community you can find some solution for pretty much everything quite quickly.

Easy to use and mac build system. Docker integration

User system. Only github and sometimes that is a struggle

CircleCI is highly configurable for many different types of workflows. We rely on CircleCI for continuous deployment. Our tests automatically run and deploy code to the correct environment depending on the branch it's pushed to. It's also generally reliable these days. Reliability was an issue for us a few years ago but those issues are mostly gone now.

Since CircleCI is highly configurable it can also be difficult to build out a custom flow that works the way you need it to. We spent more time than we wanted to getting our automated deployment system set up.

The great configurational freedom to the user makes it suitable for any and all kinds of applications. The step by step view provided is very helpful UI to track the whole process. The YML templates make it very easy to set up and the git configuration part is very well documented and just a few steps can make it work.

The pricing of the tool is a bit on the higher side compared to its competitors. Docker support is not complete.

- Is integrated with several tools like slack - Configure a project is simple and quick, and most of the cases once you have done this, you will not need to log in into the platform. You will have build going in a couple of hours. - I have it running in several project and works really well.

- Pricing could be a little bit better I guess or have a better free plan for beginners, I don't think any cons of using CircleCI actually.

The flexibility of configuring build environments for various technologies stacks and needs is key. Circle CI provides some getting started assistance through documentation and tooling, and once you’re past that there really is very little in terms of constraints holding you back from near infinite flexibility. It’s a great service!

The threshold of minimum knowledge required to get started is a bit higher than some of the competitors.

CircleCI takes away the need to fiddle with infrastructure and lets teams focus strictly on CI and CD. It's enjoyable to use, and helps integrate with multiple technologies in order to keep everything efficiently connected.

I think the only con is that it can get quite expensive fast, and when you need parallelism for tests then cost can get high quickly.

When I first starting using CircleCI with version 1 I loved the simplicity. Every code would execute the commands in a relatively simple yml file. Version 2 is far more powerful and flexible. It took me a while to get used to but I still find Circle's ease of use to make it my choice over others.

Version 2 has a lot of complexity that can make it hard to get started with. Their Orbs concept is bringing back some simplicity.

It's powerful, it's got lots of features, and the customization is limitless. CircleCI improves the developer experience many times over. It's also fairly reliable, and makes handling a large project simpler.

It can go down sometimes, debugging can be a bit hard and cryptic. Support is also fairly lackluster.

CircleCI does everything we want in a CI product, and it works in the way that we want to use it (which is visiting the CircleCI user interface as little as possible). It offers very solid integrations with other services (such as Slack and GitHub) and it works well for managing an entire team's projects without getting too cluttered.

It can be slow. Especially if you don't have a lot of parallelism, but even sometimes if you do, it can take a couple of minutes just to deploy minor changes sometimes. This isn't much of a problem in reality, it just means you might need a different approach to your deployment process (one that doesn't require you to sit and wait for CircleCI to run before you move on).

Sine the release of circleci v2.0 using containers as the main advantage using circle has become much simpler and powerfull. Their integration with IOs its a powerup in front of other CI/CD platforms

The ui really needs to cleanup a bit, make it simpler. Also their need to provide more integrations with third party tools

CircleCI was great and easy to set up. It allows me to see what's going on with all of my builds quickly and in real time.

The user management is not very good. I have 5 contributors to a repo, and I can only add two of them as users. I can't even add users that aren't a contributor to the repo. My boss, my QA people, and my PMs can't see anything that's happening in the platform.

I am using CircleCI within many projects and I like it - its feature-rich, supports every usecase we need and from my perspective is absolutely sufficient as CI/CD tool for projects I was working on. It also has free plan which could be enough for smaller teams or projects.

Not very often, but still, sometimes an inexplicable black magic happens and it requires a bit of debugging and reconfiguring of the project or the CircleCI.

The simplicity of configuration is unparalleled. We use CI on new projects day one. The ease of use, and setup, is definitely what keeps us coming back.

Lack of tools for multi project repos. We would love to keep our front and back-end code together in one repo while splitting the CI for them. So, it'd be great if we could run two builds separately based on the same repo.

Has helped up to totally streamline our development and testing workflow. Each service has it's own pipeline. The management interface and docker integration have made the setup and monitoring process super simple.

No cons were added to this review

It let's you automate continuos integration fairly easy by just using a YML file. You can setup many different stages and rules for these stages to have different development environments. It's fairly easy to learn and implement. It integrates very well with Github.

Have seen a few downtimes in the last couple of months.

Super easy configuration and initial setup. Powerful features like running steps of build/testing process in parallel. CircleCI is our teams core safety net for catching bugs and deploying safely, often.

Not a lot to dislike. Sometimes the interface changes and buttons that you used to expect to be there (like the one for rebuild with out cache) disappear. Hopefully there will be fewer of these unexpected changes as 2.0 becomes more mature.

Easy to configure via a YAML file Sends email notifications without the use of external services Not only runs our tests, but also triggers our deployments

Proactive communication about updates and breaking changes Questions to account rep can sometimes take too long (for us -- > 1 day) to respond

Great UI, easy to setup, easy to manage. All integrations "just work", we use Slack notifications, webhooks for triggering build, and even those sweet browser notifications when we need to make sure that the build is successful. Impressive Docker support.

Circle 2.0 offers improved customizability, added more features, but for small and simple projects it's not as easy to setup anymore.

It is easy to setup. It can do very fast parallel testing. I find UI of it clear and easy to use. it provide integration of many app like GitHub. it supports 8 languages and 16 databases and it also supports Headless browser.

it Does not cache docker images. Docker is way outdated on the VM provided. Other than that i don't find any problem with it. I think it is best

Circle CI is being trusted by FB for React, and Fastlane. So if it works for them I think that is a great testament to it.

Doesn't allow as many languages and environments out of the box as Travis CI does.

As any Continuous Integration tool it does what it should do. Builds and runs. Hard to say what's the most because haven't used other CI tools but CircleCI does what's expected and there was no thoughts about changing to other tools. So I would recommend using it.

The tutorials are not yet clear. They don't lead from start to workable CI.