Artifactory is a product by JFrog that serves as a binary repository manager. That said very often one will use a 'artifactory' as a synonym of the more general binary repository, much like many people use Frigidaire or fridge to denote the refrigerator regardless if it is a Frigidaire brand or not.
The binary repository is a natural extension to the ...
During development you generate a fair amount of different artifacts. These might include:
The source code
The compiled application
A deployable package
and potentially others as well
While you could use a source control system to store all of them, it's usually massively inefficient, as source control systems are usually designed to handle ...
Wikipedia has a very good answer to this question. Artifact, sometimes also called Derived Object, is a product of some process applied to the Code Repository. Originally they were called Build Artifacts, but as more processes were applied other than build to create them, the first word was simply dropped.
The major distinction is that artifacts can be ...
The way it helped me understand initially, the difference between source code repository and binary repository was to think of it like:
* Github or Bitbucket is useful to maintain all 'code'
* Jfrog Artifactory is useful to maintain the built 'binary'
At least till I was comfortable with these terms!
Also, the importance of Artifactory can be understood in ...
First, while Docker is sometimes seen and used as a ad hoc packaging system, it actually solves a totally different problem: Docker is about running programs. The Docker system allows to describe services, that can be scaled at will and to control swarms of containers. Debian packages are for installing programs and they are able to handle dependencies ...
Reasons not to store large binaries in a git repository:
Everbody cloning your repository will download all those binaries, by default. Binaries, if built regularly, tend to consume massive amounts of storage, compared to source code - git cannot compress them, or calculate deltas, to reduce their size.
git goes to great lengths to make sure history is not ...
Artifactory is a Binary Repository Manager product from Jfrog.
You're right - being a binary repository manager it is typically used to manage storage of artifacts generated and used in the software development process.
From Artifactory's main webpage:
As the first, and only, universal Artifact Repository Manager on the
market, JFrog Artifactory ...
This is a simple thumb rule one could follow
Use version control (git, svn, cvs) for the work product created by humans
Use artifact management tool (artifactory, nexus, apache archiva) for the software bundle (artifacts) created by the system thru build or packaging process
HUMAN ==> System
GIT/SVN (build/packaging) ...
I think complicating things is what everybody is getting appreciated for nowadays. I will try to answer this question in short .
Source Repository is used for storing code and its versions, while artifactory is used for storing the executable programs that are outputs of those code [ binaries - dll, jar, war, ear,msi,exe files etc]
Now the reason why you ...
JFrog Artifactory and JFrog Bintray both manage binaries (and any other file type you can think of). I'd like to see them as two different parts of your CI/CD pipeline.
Artifactory is mostly meant to be used inside the organization. For managing all binaries coming in as dependencies (like maven central jars) and being produced by your build process (like ...
It depends on the artifact repository you are using but in general, you tag the artifacts in the repository to indicate their state. This can specify it has passed some level of quality gate, some approval, or what ever is required to move through the stages.
I would say you tag the artifact as to it's state, not move between artifact repositories. A ...
Version Control (using say Git) and Artifact Management (using Artifactory) are complementary. Version control is useful for easily browsing the historical changes and who made them. Artifact management tools can do this but it's clunky. Also they don't offer a fine grained view of changes, as one version change might involve a large amount of changes.
Mainly an artifact is the result of of a build phase, this mean a package is an artifact of a kind.
A package is usually a way to install a software or application, it includes the software itself and some intelligence to setup and configure the software.
Calling an artifact a package usually comes when the artifact (whatever it is, from a .deb to a simple ...
There are two usages of the word “artefact” and one makes source code an artefact while the second makes it not being an artefact: this can indeed be quite confusing!
“artefact” as a concrete thing, vs. an ideal thing – This meaning is the common meaning of the word “an object made by a human being, typically one of cultural or historical interest” and is ...
There's repository managers and Universal package repository managers (UPM).
UPM’s can store all your build artifact for Jenkins, teamcity etc. and can generally also act as repository mangers for many different types of binary artifacts Maven, npm, NuGet and more.
These would be tools like Jfrog Artifactory, Inedo ProGet, and Sonatype Nexus.
A pretty ...
Yes, there's drawbacks.
With a .deb package you won't be able to have two version of the same application on the same host. You will have to rely on the distribution available packages, if your app rely on nodejs for example, either you'll be stuck with the distribution version or you'll have to install your own.
Now when you want to host multiples ...
A Debian (or RedHat) package to install applications has been a good practice when done correctly. Packages are used for the purpose of deploying applications which are infrequently changed. Debian packages involve some overhead, like version management, dependency management, pre&post-install scripts, etc...
In many cases upgrading from some older ...
What you're after is an Binary repository manager
Quoting from Wikipedia with added links:
Notable Universal package managers include:
I know for sure Nexus and Artifactory match your requirements (even if proper UI is a bit subjective and you mileage may vary).
You could try to run the artifactory file upload in parallel if you are using the Jenkinsfile syntax: https://github.com/jenkinsci/pipeline-examples/blob/master/pipeline-examples/parallel-from-list/parallelFromList.groovy
Here is a simpler example to run things in parallel if you only have a fixed number of things you want to do in parallel:
You can use a Git repository (whether it is hosted on Bitbucket or not) as an artifact repository, but you should be aware that:
Git was originally made as a version control system for source code, not for (large) binary data, and this is still its main concern. There are extensions that allow working with large files in Git efficiently, e.g. Git LFS, but ...
There are two options when publishing artifacts: Server and File Share.
If you publish to the server, they are stored in the TFS database. You can't configure the location, however you can configure retention policies to ensure that old builds aren't kept around forever.
If you publish to a file share, they're stored on, well, a file share.
If you are building these artifacts for a release/deploy, you will want them to be in as ready to release of a package as possible. If that is as a .zip, then yes you should create the .zip on the Jenkins server, then upload to Nexus. Your deploy system will then download, decompress, and manipulate the artifact as seen fit. In general, I would only use the ...
IMO these could be possible synonyms for scripted, in the context of your question here:
in a textual format, which you can edit in some editor, like YAML, XML, JSON, PHP, etc.
NOT in a binary format, the result of some build process (like a .EXE file, etc).
And I bet the reason for the "key prerequisite" (as in your quopted text), is that in the end you ...
There are a few main reasons why you would use Artifactory (or any other binary repository manager) over a traditional file storage (in your case NFS).
The ability to manage your artifact versions
A central location to access artifacts across infrastructure (which you have accomplished with NFS)
The ability to download/recreate previous versions of the ...
In DevOps, it is not always about just piciking the right tool, but understanding what is happening also in terms of the workflow.
Interesting aspects are here delivered value (like saved time) and how the process can be scaled if you get more customers.
Without knowing further details, I would suggest to investigate what your customers do after they have ...
I suppose the answer may vary from place to place. Where I work at the moment an artifact is anything consumed by some other entity, except for the source code used for development - this goes into source control.
This includes binaries of the product or other needed products, libraries, object files, test artifacts like media files or test data.
I'm looking this fact:
I have an ASP.NET Core 3.0 application for which I have a full CI/CD setup in Azure DevOps. The Application is hosted on a Ubuntu 18.04 server machine.
Therefore I can safely assume that you are developing ASP.NET Core 3.0 app to be hosted in Ubuntu. Any .NET Core 3.0 (or later) application means that you should rely on the dotnet ...
One argument in support of storing artifacts is that it promotes consistency when deploying across different environments.
From Continuous Delivery by Humble and Farley:
Every time you compile the code, you run the risk of introducing some difference. The version of the compiler installed in the later stages may be different from the version that you used ...
The public URLs of artifacts can be found in Workspace of the job. It is advised to use view version of URL, so it is more consistent.
For archived files, Archived Artifact Url Viewer can provide URL to a file inside a zip or jar archive within the artifact folder of a build