Top Rated DeployHQ Alternatives
51 DeployHQ Reviews
Overall Review Sentiment for DeployHQ
Log in to view review sentiment.
What I appreciate the most about DeployBot is its reliability of the platform and knowledgeable support. Extensive customization for our deployment does not limit our imagination. Great for beginners and advanced users. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
For our purpose, I have not come across something that is limiting. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Support are on the ball and there are very few barriers to entry. This platform is very friendly to noobs. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Doesn't feel like the sort of platform that will impress "super-pro" devs, but who cares. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
It's kind of easy to set up and has several useful features. If you have a not-too-big project, maybe you just have one server in cloud, you can use the SFTP option without any crazy configuration.
If you can spend some more time you can use the Atomic option and have a better experience during the release, basically your website won't experience any downtown. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The service is completely unreliable. I've been using Deploybot for the last 4 years with different companies and I've completely lost count of all the problems. Anyway, just to give a short list of the main problem you will encounter:
1. The ofter loose connection with your repository. The problem is that you don't get any notification of any kind, you just notice that your release is not going online because they don't catch the commits. Therefore you have to manually open a refresh-webhook link. Again is not just that they lose this connection, is the complete absence of any message telling you what to do/what's wrong;
2. Many many MANY times they have a slowdown in their servers that results in: you cannot release anything, any attempt just add one release request to a Queue that - sometimes - won't be executed for several hours.
3. Sometimes they don't upload the whole commint. Basically your commit has the file a,b,c in it. In deploybot's logs they say a,b,c updated but, when you check your server, you'll discover only a and b have been actually uploaded. This is - imho - the worst problem of all. This has resulted in 3 occasions (3!!) to have to manually log into the server and upload the correct files via SFTP!
4. The experience to open a ticket is just ridiculous. You have one form where you cannot even select the gravity of your ticket. For them either you have a random question or everything is broken apparently has the same priority;
5. The customer service sucks. I'm sorry but I don't really have any other way to say it differently. It seems they forget they are talking to IT expert making you lose time with non-sense questions and answers.
I used to like deploybot for its simplicity. Nowadays I always suggest all of my customers to move to a different service IF they want to avoid having so many problems. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
I love the simplicity of the UI and how easy it is to setup a project and deploy it to our servers. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
There isn't anything I dislike about DeployHQ Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Easy to set up a deployment from Git to FTP and optionally include build tasks. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Does not support .NET Core out of the box - you would have to configure the VM with an install script. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Deploybot has become an integral part of our workflow due to its ease of use and seamless integration with the services we use. Commit, push to Bitbucket, pull open Deploybot, and the latest version of our app is ready to deploy. It handles the update on Elastic Beanstalk seamlessly and allows VERY easy rollback if there's bugs or errors. By far, the fastest site update/CI tool I've used.
Also has an automatic deployment feature based on keywords in the commit, but we don't use this. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Honestly, there is nothing *not* to like here. This service works, works well, has very low friction. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Deploybot makes deploying code a breeze. It's easy to set up multiple servers to deploy to, there's numerous ways to connect (FTP, SFTP, SSH), and you can integrate with Github, Bitbucket, Gitlab, and self-hosted git servers.
You can select the branch that you deploy from, they can be automatic or manually triggered, and rollbacks, when needed, are simple.
The interface is intuitive and the price is reasonable. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Occasionally the service gets interrupted (DDOS attacks or other internal glitches). These can be really frustrating, when you need to push code out. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
1. Good guides - Deploybot has very good documentation for deployment guides, which is very helpful while setting things up. It is a growing repository which shows all the steps for building projects like Laravel and uploading automatically to VMs provided by AWS or DigitalOcean.
2. API endpoints - API endpoints let you programatically trigger a build or list/edit/delete those. While we create the builds by hand, the build triggers are used for connecting with other existing automated workflow, that we already use.
3. Building and compiling assets before deployment - Deploybot allows for building and compiling code using a script before deploying it to server. This removes the need for a separate such service or building every release before pushing to git.
4. Watch deployment progress in real time - Viewing the deployment steps occuring live along with full console output gives you the same flexibility as the older self-hosted deployment solutions. It is also easy to cancel the ongoing process at any time if anything seems wrong.
5. Rollback a release - Accidental or buggy releases can be easily rolled back with a single button, but it still takes some time to get the older release up and running.
6. Deploying without accessing servers is possible by users with low privilege access. Also, good thing is that the release notes gets shared with everyone team so that people can have a overview of all the development going on, even if they are not directly working on it. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
1. Deploying using docker container is a bit cumbersome - it takes a whole different section of configurations to be filled up which is not consistent with rest of the process. Many docker deployment integrations like Google Container Engine are currently missing, making the whole thing a half-hearted solution.
2. Docker hub integration is non-existent - so you cant directly pull updated docker images from docker hub or other hubs. They contain very well maintained packages, so it is a shame that you'll need to have a custom solution for using them or use static packages instead.
3. Windows-based hosts not supported - Windows have recently announced partnership with Canonical and released docker support on Windows. This is a really great development as it allows cross-platform development on the docker platform, which is essential for enterprises with large user base. But unfortunately Deploybot doesnt support Azure to make full use of this potential. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
