Looking at Idera portfolio, I see Embracadero (Delphi developers for many years), Sencha (Ext.js), Assembla (was GutHub of Subversion era). So it seems like they buy companies and products that were big and very important among developersin the past, but not necessary leading the pack today.<p>I didn't think of Travis in that regard, though in a past few month I started to see Circle CI badges popping here and there for opensource repositories and anecdotally many internal projects at companies are moving to GitLab and their built-in CI offering.<p>Probably a good time to sell the company, though I'd prefer if they would find a better buyer.
Circle CI has been steadily taking marketshare away from Travis for many, many years. And in my personal experience, mostly because of Travis' slow pace of improvement. Using containers for testing blows away performance on Travis for comparable tasks. Travis had made some improvements this last year to their workflows, configuration, and platform, but too little too late. My experience in dealing with their customer service (we did have a paid plan for some time) and customer feedback (feature requests, pleas for fixes, etc) was also quite poor.<p>I'd moved to Circle CI two years ago, and the only tasks/projects of mine still running on Travis are those which are deprecated, in suspended animation, or abandoned. For myself and my immediate peers, Travis is obsolete, and they did it to themselves. With Azure pipelines now a thing (and also far superior to Travis) I see another slow, slow death of a pioneering service.
I've been worried about travis' lack of urgency in dealing with the fact that the existing travis-ci.org github hooks used for open source products are going to stop working in a week or two...<p><a href="https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/9745" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/9745</a><p>Now bought by a private equity firm, which usually doesn't indicate lots of innovation or an increase in quality on the way.<p>I wonder if I should be worried and start migrating my projects. I really liked travis for so long.
Interesting. All I can tell from Idea's homepage is that it likes to acquire companies: <a href="https://www.ideracorp.com" rel="nofollow">https://www.ideracorp.com</a>. It looks like it's just a private equity firm (or the acquiring arm of one, since it's owned by TA Associates).<p>I've never heard of any of the software in Idera's brand portfolio. I wonder what the cultural change is like internally at a company joining the umbrella of a private equity firm.
Curious to what this means for the Berlin tech scene in general. Travis was certainly one of the trailblazers and a high visibility local startup (next to probably Soundcloud).
And with that I declare this product dead... Idera is the last stop to squeeze cash out of a company.<p>Expect layoffs and all future work to be outsourced via fixed cost development to lowest bidders (mostly in India<i>). Also expect a big sales push for multi year contracts.<p></i>Nothing wrong with India, just that companies like Idea don't like to have developers on payroll, and the ones that do write specs all day long.
Lots of mention of CircleCI and Gitlab as the reason for Travis' downfall, which is very true. I also think GitHub announcing GitHub Actions[1] may have been the final nail in the coffin.<p>I think GitHub Actions will become a major force in the CI market in short order, it has so many things going for it<p>a) Everyone already has an account and lots of code already lives there. One less extra thing to worry about.<p>b) I trust MS/GitHub with my Cloud secrets more than I trust the various other CI providers.<p>c) The financial backing of MS to provide a significant free tier<p>d) The fact that actions can so easily be shared on GitHub is a killer feature. More are more projects/companies will build actions for their end users.<p>1. <a href="https://github.com/features/actions" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/features/actions</a>
The first startup I was at was acquired by Idera. They started by trying to replace everyone in the dev team with remote contractors. I cashed out and left as soon as possible.
I would have loved to paid Travis CI for my personal private repositories I wanted to kept private, that I push to maybe 1-2 times a night on a good week. Setup is a breeze, interface is simple and straight to the point, integration works. But they priced their "Ideal for hobbyist projects" plan way out of budget for any hobbyist who just wants somewhere to run some code. $70 a month!? Make it $15, maybe $20 and you got yourself an annual subscriber.
Loved Travis support over the years. I wish them the best.<p>Though lately ruby-travis cli has been broken for me on Arch, and with their YAML changes & associated complexity... I'm starting to look forward to Github actions.
Lots of issues with Travis CI feature velocity as well. Most of the other pain points others have mentioned I have felt. Random build failures, network issues, and etc.<p>A particular issue is the PR merge-commit builds. Between stages a merge/push into master can change the merge-commit! This means code between stages can diverge. You may build an artifact in one stage, then run an out-of-date test suite against it in another. Known issue for years, had an employee acknowledge months ago on the community forum then.. Nothing.<p>Another pain point that is not unique to Travis, is the lack of true "pipelines". Inter-project builds are a complete DIY crap fest. Coupled with roll-your-own artifact storage and retrieval.. Self-hosted solutions like Bamboo and TeamCity(Bamboos superior IMHO) are light years ahead of the SaaS solutions I've viewed.<p>Test report analysis is another big feature missing from most. Would be good to be able to visualize and report on tests. I was almost considering this being a valid stand-alone SaaS idea because nobody has it!<p>I believe the future of our integration/system tests will be build on codepipelines or the like for scale. Travis or CircleCI will be the public facing component.
As a Sencha user that has gone through Idera acquiring a product I use, don't count on any product development or meaningful support coming out of them<p>Their model seems to be farming out choosing canned replies to the cheapest labor they can find. Things that break will stay broken, no one they keep employed will actually know how anything works, let alone how to maintain it.
Looks like a lot of people are having troubles with Travis CI in this thread, we do too.<p>With so many competing CI services out there now, it's kind of hard to keep using Travis. They've added Windows support, which is great, but it's ridiculously slow. (a minute to run on Linux, 14 minutes on Windows). And with these slow downs, you quickly run into parallel build (I believe the limit is 3 builds per user).
For people coming to this thread looking for alternatives: I'm quite happy with Scrutinizer [1], especially for the easy setup and automatic code quality analysis.<p>1. <a href="https://scrutinizer-ci.com/" rel="nofollow">https://scrutinizer-ci.com/</a>
Glad to hear that. Travis is also being used in my company and every build spawns a new virtual machine which takes almost a year to boot up. I heard good things about CircleCI. will give it a try asap.
The main problem with Travis was that is stayed with the CI part (as the name suggests) while people wanted a CI/CD solution that helps with deployments and monitoring as well.<p>F.D. I work for Codefresh a full CI/CD solution (competitor to TravisCI)