I guess this is the same pricing model as CircleCI?<p>I've always found "build minutes" to be a little bit of a vendor-favored pricing model. I really love wanting to do a release, and watching my CI provider take three minutes to pull down a 30MB docker image, or "npm install" running at dialup speeds. All while they're billing you per minute -- they make money by not investing in their infrastructure! I'd prefer to pay per byte transferred and CPU instruction executed -- if they make the hardware or network faster, the price stays the same, but they can do more work with their infrastructure. And if you schedule less work, the price for you goes down.<p>But, it's simply not done, and that's kind of sad because slow CI is probably the biggest engineering time killer in existence. Other than Hacker News ;)
The interesting part is the FOSS changes<p>Basically they significantly cut the FOSS usage by instead offering free credit and then reviewing the projects on case-by-case basis if you run out of it.<p>It's a big change, but honestly, I don't know how they could they provide free computation for any public repo no questions asked as they have been up until now.
Think the wiser options for OSS are Github Actions & Gitlab CI going forward. I have heard good things about Azure pipelines too.<p>After travis-ci got bought and layed off a lot of key staff I did think the day would come where they will no longer will be the defacto choice for open source and I think this news confirms that day being today :-)
I use the free travis to build <a href="https://github.com/purpleidea/mgmt/" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/purpleidea/mgmt/</a><p>It's 100% open source and there's almost no income (some github sponsors) for it. I guess <i>welp</i> we'll have to switch away, or have to constantly send "ask" tickets to get free credits :/<p>Many of us will be in this position.
It seems GitLab CI/CD is beating Travis CI on pretty much every metric now, except the weirdness of only using GitLab for CI/CD and not code hosting, if you prefer to use GitHub for that. Am I missing something?<p>(GitLab supports using its CI/CD on a non-GitLab repo just fine, but it can cause some initial confusion.)
Wow, OK, this is a pretty big change for most open source projects using Travis CI right now. I think most Mac and iOS apps are going to be hit by this, I think most major projects are using Travis at the moment.<p>Personally, I really like that Travis offers a variety of architectures; I’m currently running binutils on it: <a href="https://travis-ci.com/github/saagarjha/binutils-gdb" rel="nofollow">https://travis-ci.com/github/saagarjha/binutils-gdb</a>. I suspect this might be a substantial portion of the CI it sees, and it’s been great that it’s been free so far. I am unsure if it will still stay up with these changes. But, I’m sure running these kinds of builds can’t be cheap at all.
For OpenFaaS (and other projects - k3sup, arkade, inlets etc) paying for Travis isn't going to be an option, as they are open source and unfunded. The Travis platform means being able to have relatively portable CI that almost never needs to change because of the CI platform. Bring a Makefile and use it locally and in the build pipeline.<p>Moving off Travis to something like GitHub Actions will cost a significant amount of time and the opportunity cost is ridiculous.<p>This along with the Docker Hub limits makes a very strong case for GitHub's strategy.
I'm wondering if there's still a solid reason to use Travis for new projects. I can't be bothered to move my current builds from there to GitHub Actions, but for future projects GitHub Actions seems way more lucrative to use. I think both pale out in comparison to GitLab CI however, it's a pity GitLab is less popular.
Can anyone comment on how these changes are going to impact projects like conda-forge, which use the free compute time to build binaries? My reading is these projects are what's being targeted. Perhaps there are more egregious uses of their servers?
Travis "free drugs" mode worked for a while. I got used to it via my open-source projects and ended up having a couple of clients pay for it for some of my commercial work.<p>Since their acquisition they have just been going downhill. I've been planning to move all my projects to Github Actions for a while. This is the "drop that overlfows the glass" as we say in Spanish, I'm putting everything aside tomorrow to migrate all my public and private projects to Github Actions.
TL;DR: Travis CI is no longer free for open source projects. Instead you get a free trial good for 1k build minutes, and can email them to beg for more when those run out.
i wonder if there are actually higher costs associated with macOS, or if this is just segmentation based on the fact that macOS users are more willing to pay more for software
Looks like they also reduced the speed of the builds, so their 1000 minutes are getting wasted even faster.<p>On my repositories, setting up NPM now takes around 120 seconds instead of 20 seconds a month ago, time of npm run build has been increased from 7 seconds to 20 seconds...<p>The same build that took 2 minutes last month takes 4-5 minutes today
If Apple doesn't step up now to fill the gap I have to stop supporting the osx/darwin platform for all my projects. All my 5 personal Apple laptops stopped working some time ago already.<p>Now Apple looks like a legacy platform similar to Intel.