I started using Travis initially because I needed a way to have consistent builds of our desktop software (built on Electron). Travis has just the tools I needed to make this happen. Doing local builds of the software was processor intensive, I had to go check the status of the build and I was always changing software on my local machine so sometimes builds would fail because I changed something. Travis has completely containerized build machines so you get the same result every time. We now use it for building all our software. I don't know what we'd do without it.

* Affordable (it's priced based on users/seats) * Documentation is solid and easy to follow. I've never needed to contact support. There's good online Q&A since Travis has a large user base. * Versatile (whatever software you're building, there's a recipe for it) * Github integration : you get realtime build status RIGHT in Github which is awesome, once you get your system set up, you rarely ever visit Travis again. It just works.

There's really nothing I didn't like about Travis. Some of the quirks of Electron were the trickiest things to figure out, but that's not Travis's fault. There's a little learning curve when you go from building locally to building remotely with Travis where you need to understand how to set environment variables and retrieve those values in your config/script.

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).

We see it here as less and less professional. It started with a lot of time to get new images, the problem of running after 4PM (Berlin time), the cache for ccache that suddenly disappear (which makes us use even more credits, obviously), and we are missing more and more CD. It really feels as if, after Travis was bought, that the board decided to "cash in" money. You even need to pay credits now for OSS? How is that supporting it?

I liked the ease to setup a new project with it, once you know how to get around the product.

For sure this new price plan, that was announced a day *after* it was put in place (seriously?). It costs us more than half of the credits to make just one build. The price per minute is just insane. I can have more workers and unlimited build times with Azure DevOps, for about the same amount of money of just the subscription alone (so not counting those Travis add-ons). When the credits are done, then the CI will just block. You need to close and reopen the PR. Problem is that we have other GitHub integrations, so this makes the process really painful.

I'm very happy about Travis, until now I found always an answer for each need I had

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).

Good experience - got hooked on the free trial, but it's time to move on as its costing an arm & a leg.

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.

It was a good choice at the time. But I am not sure if there are now better alternatives. I would especially check for a docker based build system.

Travis has a lot of features which can be setup easily using configuration files. It is free for open source products and not to expensive for company projects.

Quite often builds are stuck which leads to a huge stop in developments in hour company because we pretty much rely on it. Also the builds starts quite slow.

The product is easy to use -- even non-technical people in our team are able to have a look at it and understand why a test failed. It is good that it provides much info about each step it runs

The dev documentation can be improved -- we had some hard time setting up our acceptance test infrastructure as it wasn't clear to us where to set environment variables. Sometimes it takes a long time for Travis to indicate that a GitHub PR is being tested by displaying the orange dot -- not sure if this is a Travis or Github issue, though.

It works. Which is always a good thing. Other tools exist, but Travis always seemed the simplest to implement with GitHub.

Seemingly no reason to change things but reworking the domain. Not exactly sure what the whole point was.

For some reason Travis CI seems like the Godfather of CI even though it popped up at the same time as the others. I think this is because they aggressively had a bot add testing to open source projects, and it seemed to work.

For the price even though Travis CI is great its a little expensive.

I have used it for deployments, software integration, and testing.

You can deploy and make integrated development environments with this. This facilitates testing and integration of software.

It is complex to set up. You have to read the documentation that is not too easy to follow. You could get better results following other tutorials.

can easily see all the repositories and the result.

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

We are using Travis CI mostly for our products that have a PHP backend and a Angular PWA application. We are prerendering all pages in our CI process which, for some reason got really slow in the last 12-24 month. I dont know if Travis CI is limiting external HTTP requests (which we rely on to get the content to render). For example a project with 500 subpages takes 30minutes to render. We already checked our Backend endpoints and these are not the limiting factor. Running is locally is has a built time for around 5-6 minutes.

I like the ease of deployments especially with multi-step-deploys of websites where the backend and frontend should be in sync.

Only thing I need to complain is the pricing. For a small design and development agency like us the price of the "concurrent job"-based plan is way too expensive while our current credit-based plan (which i'm happy that this exist) is very often exceeded due to the nature of our deployments.

I would say 'yes' for TravisCI 2 years ago, but nowadays there are better alternatives to this product, such as Github Actions. My overall experience with TravisCI started quite positive but ended negatively because of the unreliable service they are providing at the moment. If you are running a critical business with 0 tolerance to downtime, TravisCI wouldn't be a wise choice nowadays.

TravisCI did a great job for many years, across different CI/CD tools, by providing a rich feature set and well-documented functionality.

Unfortunately, TravisCI is not very reliable. It's having constant downtimes for many months. TravisCI announced the deployment API v2 for a long time ago, but never released the stable version. On the other hand, after the recent acquisition of Idera, many talented developers have left the company. Therefore their development speed and shipment of the important features seem to be delayed.

It was pretty much ok, even though the CI infra stayed behind the competition in terms of software used in builder images, and also available features. Perhaps that was the reason the company started struggling at some point in time - with GitHub and GitLab seriously upping the game, and Circle CI having started quite long ago and moving around faster than Travis CI - it was more inertia and a bit of simplicity that kept me around. And then the company simply ghosted its open source users for something like 4 months, stopping the free service (despite previous promises they wouldn't) and saying nothing on what to expect. Needless to say, for CI it was a complete dealbreaker. I went away and never looked back.

Back when I started, the onboarding was very straightforward, as long as you used GitHub. Fairly reliable for my low-profile usage. Simple and direct user interface.

It grew worse when the company behind Travis CI got sold; downtimes became more frequent, builder image upgrades didn't really get up to speed - but the worst was to leave an extremely short runway to the free tier for open source users with no prior announcement. That's not so much about the software, it's about the company. Free tier or not, in CI segment you just can't afford such things.

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.

It's easy to use and configure and also a nice user experience.

It's expensive in comparison to other solutions

Good, but can be

Travis is the only ci tool that have VT-x enabled! It's also well known, simple to use.

Paid compared to github action. At least it could be cool to have come montlhy free credits, for just a few to maintain some OSS project in RUN mode. Not so configurable: I can't come with my own VM ISO so I'm forced to download all prerequisite package every time for each builds: most of my credits go there... As I'm part of multiple orgs, it's hard to know which credits are spent where. Also, the authorization mecanism is not that clear: I don't know exactly what travis sees from my github infos.

Ensuring that the master branch of my projects remains stable and of release quality, by only allowing changes that pass CI to be merged.

Web interface is fast and responsive. Builds are quite fast. It's free for OSS. Quite good documentation (comprehensive). Supports several environments, including Macs (and now Windows too).

Not so easy to determine exactly what you need to run (e.g. which packages to install, what to sudo). A simulator/interactive environment for testing would be nice!

Using Travis CI (educational plan) has helped my students to gain some real-world devops experience. It has allowed me, as an educator, to offer them this experience.

I use Travis CI in my software engineering class so that my students can build and deploy to cloud-hosted websites. My students find it relatively easy to setup and use. As an educator I have oversight over all of my students' projects. I find the build history particularly useful as I can see how often builds are occurring and whether they are passing or failing. Ideally, projects should be built often and most builds should succeed. Travis CI really helps me to assess these aspects.

There are no real cons that I can think of.

Everything listed in the Cons section? :)

Lack of first-class support for build artifacts. The configuration format for a multi-stage pipeline isn't straightforward and a bit unusual among the competition. No support for 3rd-party extensions.

We use to travis to build our API and deploy it. Various websites as well. Have used the product to integrate with Veracode.

Travis integrates with github, and slack.

Sometimes the scripting of yaml files is agonizing.