我花了一个小时左右的时间才弄清楚哈德森最近才开店(2011年1月)。 我不知道现在每个分支的变化有多快，但更重要的是，每个分支的方向是什么，关键点是什么，让人可以做出选择。
有人有产品路线图和功能差异的链接吗?
当前回答
我有两点要补充:第一，Hudson/Jenkins是关于插件的。插件开发人员已经转向Jenkins，我们这些用户也应该如此。第二，我个人并不是甲骨文产品的忠实粉丝。事实上，我对他们避之唯恐不及。用在甲骨文解决方案的授权和硬件上的钱，你可以雇佣两倍的工程人员，还可以每周五买啤酒。
其他回答
对于那些提到和解作为哈德森和詹金斯潜在未来的人来说，事实上詹金斯将加入SPI，在这一点上他们不太可能和解。
以下是詹金斯网站http://jenkins-ci.org上的总结。
简而言之，Jenkins CI是领先的开源持续集成服务器。它使用Java构建，提供了300多个插件来支持构建和测试几乎任何项目。
甲骨文现在拥有Hudson商标，但已在Eclipse EPL下授权使用。詹金斯在麻省理工学院的执照上。Hudson和Jenkins都是开源的。在我看来，基于你为谁工作以及个人对开源的偏好，这个决定很简单。
希望这对你有帮助。
正如chmullig所写，使用Jenkins。一些附加的要点:
In fact, arguably it was Oracle who did the forking! And technically, too, that's kinda what happened. It's interesting to see what comes out of "Hudson" though. While the "Winston summarizes the state and rosy future of the Hudson project" stuff they posted on the (new) Hudson website originally seemed like odd humour to me, perhaps this was a purposeful takeover, and the Sonatype guys actually have some big ideas up their sleeve. This analysis, suggesting a deliberate strategy by Oracle/Sonatype to oust Kohsuke and crew to create a more "enterprisy" Hudson is a very interesting read! In any case, this brief comparison a fortnight after the split—while not exactly scientific—shows Jenkins to be by far more active of the two projects.
.．.还有一点背景信息:
Hudson的创造者Kohsuke Kawaguchi在他的空闲时间开始了这个项目，即使他在Sun Microsystems工作，后来他们付钱让他进一步开发。正如@erickson在另一个SO问题中指出的那样，
[哈德森/詹金斯]是一位天才的产物 intellect-Kohsuke川口。因为 这是一致的，连贯的， 坚如磐石。
After the acquisition by Oracle, Kohsuke didn't hang around for long (due to lack of monitors...? ;-]), and went to work for CloudBees. What started in late 2010 as conflict over tools between the dev community and Oracle and ended in the rename/fork/split is well documented in the links chmullig provided. To me, that whole conundrum speaks, perhaps more than anything else, to Oracle's utter inability or unwillingness to sponsor an open-source project in a way that keeps all parties (Oracle, developers, users) happy. It's not in their DNA or something, as we've seen in other cases too.
综上所述，我个人认为Kohsuke和其他核心开发者在这个问题上的看法是一致的，我认为Jenkins是正确的。
我有两点要补充:第一，Hudson/Jenkins是关于插件的。插件开发人员已经转向Jenkins，我们这些用户也应该如此。第二，我个人并不是甲骨文产品的忠实粉丝。事实上，我对他们避之唯恐不及。用在甲骨文解决方案的授权和硬件上的钱，你可以雇佣两倍的工程人员，还可以每周五买啤酒。
詹金斯是新的哈德森。它实际上更像是一个重命名，而不是一个分支，因为整个开发社区都转移到了Jenkins。(甲骨文只能坐在角落里拿着他们的老球“Hudson”，但现在它只是一个没有灵魂的项目。)
c.f. Ethereal -> WireShark
