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).

Our initial years with Travis were successful, and we were quite happy with the product. But over time, the lack of flexibility meant struggling to create and deploy our CI definitions. But the part that killed Travis for us was the change to OSS terms late in 2020. We'd already noticed that our queues would become long, particularly if we had many contributors or maintainers working simultaneously. But with the changes in terms, we quickly ran into a scenario where we ran out of hours by mid-month. This left us with an untenable situation; as an OSS project, we have limited funds, and we would quickly run through those if we purchased a plan. As a result, we are within 1-2 weeks of moving off the platform entirely.

When we first started using the product, it was one of the few that existed, and it provided us exactly the assurances we needed to have predictable, stable software releases. Idempotent runs made it possible to know exactly when and why something failed.

Since we produce OSS libraries, it's important for us to test against each language version we support. Unfortunately, there is no way in Travis to dynamically create a matrix based on the library/package definition itself. For instance, we produce PHP libraries, and our package management solution, Composer, allows us to specify in the package the versions we support. Unfortunately, when we change those, we also need to remember to change the Travis definitions to reflect those changes. This becomes a source of error very quickly - Travis may report all is green, but it turns out we haven't added the new PHP version to the matrix, so it's a false sense of assurance. On top of that, it's impossible to succinctly make discrete jobs that do different things. For instance, I don't need to run coding standards checks, static analysis, and documentation linting for every single job in the matrix; I really only need to run these once. But to do that, Travis forces me to define env variables for jobs, and then use conditionals to determine what to run. This makes the CI definitions very convoluted, and, if you have a lot of repositories that need to do the same, hard to distribute when you have changes to make. Other CI systems address this.

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).

I like that I can see the live status from GitHub and that the UI is very simple. I can easily find everything. The console output is colorized (it's not in other CI software I've used).

Sometimes parts of log output is collapsed, which has hidden an error for me before. It took a while, but my team figured it out.

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.

Between the cons described above, the service degradation I've observed in the past 6 months and your recent organizational and pricing changes (we are an open-source project and directly impacted), I'll be setting up Github actions to run my CI tests from here onwards (this is also about standardizing with other projects in my organization) and will deactivate my travis account.

It worked really nicely until about 6 months ago ! The previous unlimited open-source plan was generous, and a huge selling point.

Service has been less than ideal since the decision to move OSS projects travis-ci.org. We have felt this throttling of resources, and it was an indication that things were about tho change for the worse. I was surprised to find that from one day to the next my CI builds weren't being run anymore. Sure enough, you had a banner announcing the change from travis-ci.org to .com , but I didn't understand it would require changes on my side, and I didn't receive an email letting me know that my CI builds would just stop if I didn't manage it. I'll admit my fault in not checking more thoroughly. Moving from .org to .com was not as easy as I would have liked (Why do I need to sign up for a beta? Why is it in beta, and why do you need more decisions from me that I don't have all the information to decide?), but I eventually got there.

It does the job with reliability. I have no reason to change.

The UI has not evolved for years I think. I'm constantly doing the same 10 clicks to do the same things everyday, that I could have done in 1-click with a better UI. There are no insights, no "nice to have". It may work but I have absolutely no attachment to the product and could change without missing anything. In fact, I'll probably rationalize the number of tools we have by switching to Heroku CI or Github Actions, since they do as much as Travis I have no need for another tool.

It was great until the pricing model changed and customer service disappeared.

It's easy to integrate into GitHub and gives students near instant feedback about their code.

I had a problem with the non-existent customer support. On 1/16 I wrote customer support to get my class organization "blessed" as an educational account. I followed up on 1/26. With no response and credits disappearing, I'll be moving this class and future classes to GitLabs for student work.

Fine until I tried to talk with support.

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.

I use travis for continouse integration and continous delivery of NoraUi Open source Framework

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.

A must have for any configuration/development team needing to move fast but also have control over the process to ensure things work as expected.

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.

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.

Very pleased with the product

Works and integrates seemlessly. Love it.

Pricing model has changed. I understand. We are open source and non-profit so moving away.

* Easy to use * It was free for opensource

* The support has not been answering for 2 months * It look like it is not free for opensource now.

I mostly achieved to set up the tests and intregrate them seamlessly with the GitHub Version Control System.

The Integration with the Version Control Software helped me to iterate the development easier and with more confidence while being sure not have left over open ends. The detailed test output helps me to understand very well how the software runs at the test.

I would love more generic tests that would help to build test for non standard implementations: https://travis-ci.com/github/bodo-hugo-barwich/hash-lists I would love also be able to choose different testing environments besides Ubuntu, like Debian or Centos. Spin up additional containers for testing distributed systems. Legacy Perl 5.10 Support was dropped without documenting it correctly. The test returned OK when it actually failed to install the Perl 5.10 environment. In the Project Description it should alert correctly which versions are supported.

Previously it was absolutely good for open source projects! Not I can't migrate it quickly to new version. And surprisingly I have negative credits for free plan. And the service can't see my open-source organization. Guys, this is not funny.

Travis-ci.org was an excellent service until I have to switch to new Travis-ci.com.

Bad migration flow from old travis-ci.org. Couldn't bring it up in 30 minutes.