Stacktape vs. Flightcontrol

Stacktape and Flightcontrol are very similar. But there are a few notable differences.

More supported AWS resources

Stacktape supports many resources that Flightcontrol doesn't. Such as

• Serverless Next.js using OpenNext
• Aurora SQL databases
• ElasticSearch (OpenSearch)
• SNS, SQS, EventBus
• Bastion server (jump host) for connecting to resources in private subnets
• & many more

More packaging (build) options

To package your containers, Stacktape offers paketo buildpacks, nixpacks, and even Stacktape-native, heavily-optimized buildpack which is probably the fastest way to package JS/TS applications.

Stacktape also offers automatic packaging for lambda functions (which also efficiently packages dependencies).

More deployment options

You can install Stacktape CLI (or Typescript or Python SDK) directly to your local system, and deploy from there.

This can significantly speeds up the development feedback loop compared to using a CI/CD server.

More supported Git providers

Stacktape supports Github, Gitlab and Bitbucket.

Additionally, you can easily integrate Stacktape into any CI/CD pipeline, thanks to Stacktape CLI.

Infrastructure as a Code first approach

Both Stacktape and Flightcontrol allow you to configure your infrastructure using IaC.

With Stacktape, IaC is a first-class citizen. Our Interactive Config Editor removes all the annoying parts from writing IaC while retaining all of its advantages.

Stacktape config can be written in YAML, JSON or Typescript. Using Typescript gives you much more flexibility, should you need it.

More flexibility

Stacktape is designed from day one to be flexible.

Everything Stacktape deploys can be configured or overridden.

Stacktape templates can be extended using AWS CloudFormation, and even AWS CDK constructs.