When comparing Hudson vs Assertible - QA for the Web, the Slant community recommends Assertible - QA for the Web for most people. In the question“What are the best continuous integration tools?” Assertible - QA for the Web is ranked 21st while Hudson is ranked 27th. The most important reason people chose Assertible - QA for the Web is:
There are several built-in assertions for working with JSON data -- like validation, length() functions, JSONPath selectors, and more.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Most of the features found on Jenkins are also available for Hudson
Since Jenkins and Hudson share much of the same code base, they also share many of the same features. Hudson is also very easy to install: there is simply a single .war file which is run inside the root of the directory where Hudson will be installed.
Pro Extensive JSON data assertions
There are several built-in assertions for working with JSON data -- like validation, length() functions, JSONPath selectors, and more.
Pro Deployments API to track releases and run tests
The Assertible Deployments API allows you to track releases of your application and automatically initiate post-deploy API tests.
Pro Out-of-the-box support for GitHub deployments
Pro Effortless setup
Cons
Con Superseded by Jenkins
Jenkins is a fork from Hudson and therefore inherits most of it's source code. But Jenkins has far more commits and is a lot more active on the development side than Hudson. A lot of plugin developers have also chosen to support Jenkins and develop their product for Jenkins only.