SonarQube Reviews

Its dashboards, quality profile, quality gates and CI integration features (like as build breaker plugin) are the most valuable features for me.

Personally, I have used SonarQube for educational purposes. SonarQube is helpful for giving motivation to a small development team (10 members or a little above) on code quality improvements with small efforts.

My team uses just two features - dashboards and CI-build-breaker - for checking code quality and the stability of our code base. For those purpose, SonarQube has done its work greatly. We have seen a decrease of about 25% of issues from since we first started using it a few months ago, and my team code bases are getting better.

The only thing I don't like is that they removed the design libraries and dependencies-checking features from v5.2. I hope they reintroduce these features in the future.

I've used it for approximately two years, since December 2013.

I have not encountered any issues.

I have not encountered any issues.

I have not encountered any issues.

I've not had to use them. I thinks it's online documentation is up to date, and it is enough to use them to solve problems and to understand features.

I've not had to use them.

My development team adopted SonarQube in January 2015 for code quality improvement, and had not used any code quality checking tool before.

The initial setup is easy. They provide a step-by-step online guideline to follow for installing it.

It has decreased the efforts of my team for finding and fixing potential issues which exist in our code base.

We are only using the free features.

Just keep following their online installation and plugin development guide.

We are using this solution to check and monitor application code to ensure security quality.

The solution has helped us mitigate problems in applications before they were a bigger issue.

The solution could improve by having better-consulting services.

I have been using SonarQube within the last 12 months.

The stability is good.

The installation was straightforward, we have an internal team that does it.

We have a team in our organization that does the implementation, configuration, and maintenance of the solution.

The price of the solution could be reduced.

I rate SonarQube a ten out of ten.

When it comes to security, this solution is pretty great.

The static code analysis of the solution is the most important aspect for us. When it comes to security breaches within the code, we can leverage some rules to allow us to identify the repetition in our code and the possible targets that we may have. It makes it very easy to review our code for security purposes.

The solution is quite stable.

You can scale the solution if you need to.

In terms of solving for security breaches in the code, we are looking for different tools to help us catch things much sooner. Right now, we're not doing so well on this front.  Therefore, we are looking for some other options in the market. I'm not the one who is tasked with looking at the moment, however, we are actively seeking out a more effective option for the static code analysis. 

There are sometimes security breaches in our code, which aren't be caught by SonarQube. In the security area, SonarCube has to improve. It needs to better compete with other products.

The solution could offer some sort of alert feature. We've had an incident, where somebody removed the solution from the pipeline and there were a couple of code instances that were pushed and married with the codebase without passing through SonarQube. It would be nice if we were alerted to that. If the solution is off-line or turned off, we'd like to be able to tell so that we can decide if it should be on or if it was a mistake.

It would be great if it could support testing and configurations a bit more. 

We've only been working with the solution for one year. It hasn't been that long.

The solution is very stable. We don't have any issues with its reliability. It's been quite good so far.

The architecture that we have is not that big, however, from the scalability point of view, SonarQube supports scalability quite well.

At the moment, we have a hybrid working model on the vendor side, as well as on the in-house team. The in-house team has 5 members and the vendor has maybe 20 people, more or less. All in all, we can say we have about 25 people using the solution at any given time.

We did not previously use a different solution. It was always manual code reviewing via the most experienced team members who would offer guidance on adjustments.

Right now, we are not using the enterprise features of the solution. I don't know about the licensing as I was not the one who introduced SonarQube into the pipeline. I believe we are using the free community edition and therefore aren't actually paying any money for it.

I did an exercise a couple of months ago with my colleague. After this, I listed other products and their security aspects. I don't know if we found a solution that can offer us better features for security. I don't know if we will keep SonarQube in the pipeline or we will sell the product and get another product. I'm not sure at this point.

We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I believe we are using the latest version of the solution, however, I don't know the exact number.

I would advise others considering the solution to consider the level of security they need. If they are very concerned about security and the application is very sensitive, then SonarQube may not be the best option and they should seek out other products.

Overall, I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use this SonarQube solution for code quality and as a basic security issues solution for our clients.

It has improved our options for offering products to our clients that can better meet their needs, lower costs, and improves code quality and basic security. 

Code analyzing is very valuable for detecting vulnerabilities but it has limitations.

With the aesthetic code analyzer or dynamic code analyzer, we would like to see zero vulnerabilities. This is actually currently not available with any available code analyzer so it is not the fault of this one product. We would like to see that the latest CVE (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) gets represented. This would be more useful but does not always happen. 

If we have more of an idea of the likelihood of zero vulnerabilities then the product is more useful for user communities.

The product is stable.

We use a centralized machine so scalability is not an issue. We have yet to realize a limitation.

We have little or no interaction with technical support.

We service client needs so we consider all solutions we are aware of and weigh the pros and cons for deployment with a specific client.

Implementation is easy and very straightforward. We do a POC with our client and based on that we make a comparison to the client's needs and available solutions. We compare that with any of the open source options and with any of the premium commercial tools. We go with the one that makes sense. But the implementation of this product is not complex especially as we have experience with it.

We do our own implementations for various clients. We do not need the assistance of another team.

Return on investment is enhanced code and security. The actual ROI is difficult to measure except that licensing a commercial product will cost more over the long term if this product is enough to meet the user's immediate needs.

The product is basically free, so implementation is the greater cost. It will cost in man-hours for deployment and resources, or in consultation. The licensing fee is negligible.

We are constantly evaluating other products. So it might be that we will go with Micro Focus, for example, or any other tool in the future. It depends on what is offered by the product and what fits the client needs and budget.

I would rate this product somewhere between six and seven. It works for many clients, but if the user need and application is super critical, people should go with commercial products like Micro Focus. If the deployment is less critical, they can go with that as SonarQube, or another open source software solution.

We have literally thousands of rules and they are of medium effectiveness. The problem is that most people bypass the rules or turn them off. But even that is information to us. The fact that they have to turn the rules off is as much value to us as the rules themselves.

Code coverage of tests is their most valuable feature. Code coverage is of no value if it's high, but if it's a low number then that's of great value to me.

I would like to see something around mutation testing included in SonarQube. I'd like to see some mechanism of quality which has real meaning. The problem in metrics is that they're correlated. I'd like to see how they can add a feature to detect genuine quality, instead of numbers that people can game. The number can be manipulated. There are a few ways to do this, and mutation testing is one of them.

I would also be interested in more security scanning.

Stability has never been a problem. It would have to be unstable for me to experience a problem, and we haven't. So it's good.

I don't really know how scalable this solution is, but I know we use it on thousands of projects, so it's probably good.

We have a pipeline. The pipeline currently runs 4000 teams through it, and all of them have SonarQube but usually with default rules. So that's pretty expensive. Now, we can't increase it because everything goes through it. We are evaluating what our best option is as we migrate our pipeline. We're migrating the pipeline and we're wondering what to do. If SonarQube did more security scanning, there's a good chance that we would use it more, in a different role. We're already using SonarQube everywhere, in some aspect.

It was years ago. They probably evaluated other solutions. 

We're evaluating the use of different solutions at the moment, but I've just withdrawn from that task.

In all the companies that I've worked with, nobody has ever had a problem with the initial setup. It takes time to set up. It's a big thing and you do it, but it's just a project.

We used people in-house to deploy. We have about 100 people in our pipeline maintenance team. SonarQube has not led to any significant increase in that number. It's just absorbed as a part of the cost. There are no dedicated staff working on it.

My advice is to focus on quality, not on tools. Work on the quality of your code and get a quality culture, but don't require the use of a tool. SonarQube is an okay tool. I'd suggest it as a default tool, but I wouldn't rave about it.

In all of my previous jobs, there has been somebody using SonarQube. They're usually very positive. I don't share that positiveness, but the reasons for that are that I don't believe you can have metrics of code quality based upon code analysis. I don't think it's possible for a computer to do it.

I don't rate any tool higher than a five or six, ever. JUnit is the only tool that gets a rating of ten. On a scale of one to ten, where ten is JUnit, I would rate SonarQube as about a five or a six.

We decided to implement the solution to keep up to date with testing, security, and other issues with developments, such as bugs.

In regards to features, overall the product is good. It minimizes the difficulty or issues that we encountered during the production. We are using the open-sourced version and issues can easily be resolved.

I have been using the solution for four to five years.

We are using everything that is open-source and this allows us when we have the regular day to day issues, our team works on them directly to identifying their causes and they resolve them quickly.

We have our internal team that is very knowledgeable, experienced, and have extreme abilities that handle our needs.

I think comparing the product to competitors it should be less expensive.

I would recommend SonarQube. It is a good deal compared to all other tools on the market.  It certainly helped us, it is a good tool and should be definitely used.

I rate SonarQube a nine out of ten.

We use this solution for auditing our system.

The overall quality of the indicator is good.

I am not very pleased with the technical debt computation, it's a bit arbitrary.

The codification metrics could also be improved.

I have been using the open-source version, on and off, for the past few years. 

The scalability is ok, but if you want to process large portfolios, it breaks down. 

The technical support is reasonable.

The initial setup was reasonable.

There is a licensing fee, but I don't know the exact cost because I use this solution in partnership with other companies.

I have experience with Parasoft and other similar tools. 

I would absolutely recommend this solution to another company.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight. I would give it a higher rating if the technical debt computation was improved.

Our software developers use SonarQube to catch any issues that can be found by using static code analysis. My understanding is that it checks the core complexity by evaluating the coding rules to make sure of things such as the correct classes are private.

The developers are rejecting the idea that this product is useful.

Before you even compile, it can catch known vulnerability issues or patterns.

Our developers have complained about the Quality Gates and the number of false positives that this product reports. Their older code is breaking and with the Quality Gate on the pipeline, they are not able to safely release at this point. This means that they have to add a lot of things to the whitelist, so there is room for improvement in this regard.

We have been using SonarQube for less than six months. We have not yet onboarded it for production.

I have not seen any problems in terms of stability, although it has not been onboarded yet. Once that happens, we may see more problems.

We have not tried to scale yet.

The initial setup involved downloading the open-source code and installing it in a container. 

I was responsible for setting up this tool in our company.

We are using the open-source version, which is available free of cost.

We evaluated other open-source products and found that SonarQube was the best one of the set.

This product is regularly updated by the open-source community, although the changes are often project-specific and may not help in the general case.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.