Avis clients sur Travis CI

I like how easy it is to deploy and get up and running with this software and configuration files, etc (e.g. it's essentially just a commandline which is nice).

It was also really nice for all of my open-source projects while travis-ci.org was still running. I could deploy and have builds run without having to worry about money.

Ever since the move to travis-ci.com, support has been terrible and I've used up all of my free trial credits on my open-source web application's Cypress integration tests (https://github.com/tutorbookapp/tutorbook).

I contacted support 5 days ago and still haven't heard back about getting more open-source credits for my account. I seriously miss travis-ci.org (though I completely understand the problems with cryptocurrency mining, etc).

1. Documentation, maybe the most important value
2. Configuration flexibility in particular GIT SSH custom keys, env variables with sensitive information, build trigger (with inline configuration... very useful for testing configurations), machine SSH encrypted keys, configuration imports, custom scripts
3. Easy integration with GitHub

Permissions check (it's not so clear understand who can build, who can view build history, who can edit configuration).

Established service;
Easy to configure;
Supports macOS and AArch64 Linux

Pricing structure for free and Open Source projects

I really like Travis CI, creating .travis.yml files is easy enough & I love the interface for seeing my build progress. That said I'll be moving off of this platform very shortly.

The cost is insane - Azure DevOps offers pipelines for free, my AWS sites (5 of them) cost less to host than my Travis CI subscription, AWS has a DevOps implementation that is about $15/mo - even if Travis CI was at $20-$25/mo I would consider it as a solution.

Really easy to use, workflow was easy and UI is nice for debugging. No complaints about the product.

Too darn expensive. $69/month is too expensive for me and the one-time credit allowance would only get me so far before I have to switch. There needs to be some way to purchase minutes/credits on a pay as you go plan or a monthly allotment on a $5-10 a month plan.

can easily see all the repositories and the result.

It taking lots of time to set up a test suite.

We use it to run php unit tests whenever we commit code to a repository. All we have to do is include a file in the root of the project and enable the project in the travis interface. Takes less than 5 minutes to set up fully automated unit testing. Much more easy than setting up your own CI pipeline with the huge amount of different apps that exists. Generous free tier.

Can be slow at times, documentation can on occasion be more minimal than I would like. As a developer you get used to this though, there are always loads of examples online.

I pushed hard for my team to build our CI/CD pipeline using Travis. It is just a tremendous tool, and I'm deeply grateful that we have this tool in our toolkit.

[SENSITIVE CONTENT HIDDEN] said "If I had eight hours to chop down a tree, I’d spend the first six of them sharpening my axe." Travis CI is one of the sharpest tools we have, and it's made a massive difference in speeding up our team's productivity. You guys recently gave us the option to upgrade our private Travis CI to include even higher numbers of parallel builds, which made a massive difference to our ability to grow our development team, and to increase the rate at which we build our own software.

For a while, we were working very hard on our end to try to figure out how to speed up our builds, and had to do quite a bit of work to try to optimize our software architecture to optimize around the limits on build concurrency in Travis. We made some progress on that, but it was slow going, and ultimately you gave us an option to pay for a higher degree of parallelism.

Travis CI is a must for our team as we work in an agile environment that requires constantly deployments. Travis makes that easy to do and helps us track/monitor changes and have them tested in real time.

I have found that the debugging process can be a little tedious because of the lack of information in error messages. I've also noticed some issues where I need to re-run jobs without explanation.

It does the job it is intended to do. For years I haven't had complaints until I had to deal with customer service...

Customer service is terrible. Turn arounds are 24 hours are more. Responses are unhelpful and sometimes there's no response at all. My most recent experience involved trying to get a new hire access to our projects/org in Travis. He sent multiple emails back and forth with support, each time they said they'd fixed it and nothing had changed. Eventually he stopped getting responses. I also tried submitting a ticket and got no response at all.

Its easy to use by default in new Ember web apps.

All configuration goes in a single monolithic travis.yml file, and the syntax of this file is very mysterious. Understanding what a particular configuration does is difficult, and its difficult to figure out how to satisfy new requirements.

In contrast, github actions allow for the separate configuration of many different workflows, and offer comparatively much better documentation.

We mostly continue to use travis because we've already figured out how to configure it for our basic needs with a few projects, and our company has already purchased a plan. Its difficult to switch to another system, largely due to company politics.

multi compilation Oracle Java8, OpenJDK8, Oracle Java11, OpenJDK11, nodeJS, ...

In new or last version of Travis-CI, I have often this error with the Chrome webdriver:
"web view not found"

My builds use 4 instances (Oracle Java8, OpenJDK8, Oracle Java11, OpenJDK11) and I still have several instances that do not go through because of this error; it is never the same who do not pass. by relaunching several times it can work.

Remove the manual work in running tests before merging code.
Also it's scalable to multiple branches and developers.
And it give viability on how the build is broken if any issues arise.

1. A bit slow comparing to running the tests on local machine.
2. Have a verbose limitation of 4MB.

The free version have a good result and usability

Somtimes it's hard to configure the test suite

Very easy to set up, and out of the box gives me a lot of control over my deployments.

It's more expensive compared to competing tools for smaller companies.

I like the ease to setup the CI for automating the deployments in the different applications

probably the cost if you can start to use it and don't have an idea of estimate cost

I use this tool for my home and personal activities (home automation).
It is very helpful to analyze software and identify problems in script/source code.
Very easy to configure and integrate.

In general I'm very satisfied. I have nothing to complain about.

- YML configuration file
- Familiar UI
- Easy to get to "hello world" stage

- AWFUL support
- High price, slow builds
- Confusing billing options

Free for open source repositories. Easy to integrate status checks for pull requests. One time integration.

Sometimes build time takes too long. User interface is not the best but it is ok when you have integrated it into your GitHub repository(because you never go there anymore :) )

It's easy to set up and requires almost no maintenance.

Had to wait a bit before upgrading to .net 5 because there was no build environment available for it at first.

It does exactly what I need, and gets out of the way.

I can't think of anything I'd improve. Perhaps a regular install of Python 3.8 and 3.9 without the matrix thing?