When comparing Hudson vs Gitlabs integrated CI, the Slant community recommends Gitlabs integrated CI for most people. In the question“What are the best self-hosted continuous integration tools?” Gitlabs integrated CI is ranked 4th while Hudson is ranked 12th.
Specs
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 CI is integrated into the version control system
Pro Open-source
Pro Easiest CI for Windows binary, because of Docker-Windows Runner Executor
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Con Superseded by Jenkins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.
Con Security risks
Con Only works with gitlab
Con Not lightweight
Not a lightweight solution, demanding and memory hungry.
Con No Windows support
No Windows support, but it's possible to use a Bitnami stack.