Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

jeffgeerling.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–148 of 148 posts

Re: Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

#141

Post by jrochkind1 »

yorwba wrote: post #92
jrochkind1 wrote: post #44

Travis has an FAQ whose URL says "open source repository migration", but whose on-page title says "Migrating repositories to travis-ci.com" Travis Staff accounts in the travis "community forum" were linking to this FAQ as recently as 9 days ago, which still at this moment contains a question: > Q. Will Travis CI be getting rid of free users? # > A. Travis CI will continue to offer a free tier for public or open-sourc…

> They're providing an FAQ about "free accounts" without saying there no longer is no such thing as a free account, and "open source projects" are "joining private projects on travis-ci.com" only in the sense they can choose to pay for the same plans as private projects. https://travis-ci.com/plans Was the "free plan" added after you commented? > Free Plan > Free > - 10000 Credits > - Unlimited unique users > - Priva…

Mouse over the (?) icon. "Free plan is trial plan. The credits will not be replenished. Switch to Free Plan if you want to cancel your subscription."

So, yeah, there is something they call the "free plan". If gives you 10K "credits" that once they are gone they are gone (I'm not sure exactly what a "credit" corresponds to in terms of workers/minutes, but could probably find it somewhere).

Do you feel like this is what you expected it to be, that they are being transparent about the fate of open source projects that previously had free CI? You can say you do, it's your perspective!

Re: Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

#142

Post by jrochkind1 »

account42 wrote: post #122
jrochkind1 wrote: post #19

Oh boy, I just moved my projects from travis-ci.org to travis-ci.com after the builds stopped happening on .org. (Despite the travis FAQ that said "we’re making a number of changes to the travis-ci.org infrastructure to ensure the service will remain as reliable and available to you as it always has been until [it goes away Dec 31]", that was not the case, builds simply stopped working on .org. https://docs.travis-ci…

> we all know we can't develop this stuff without CI Of course we can, we just down't want to.

True. We have just learned what an advantage CI is to software quality and developer productivity, expectations for both of which have been raised because of pervasive use of CI.

Many people wound up discovering/learning that and raising expectations because Travis's extraordinarily easy-to-use and reliable, and free for open source service, got them to try it out and discover the benefits. People had been talking about how everyone should be doing CI before travis, but I think travis played a major role in significantly increasingly how many people were actually doing CI (and thus learning that they didn't want to do without it's benefits), changing the way software is developed. Which is to the credit of those who developed the original travis service, for sure.

I think it really created a market, by offering something with very low barriers that 'hooked' people. Now we're hooked.

Re: Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

#143

Post by rochak »

azdle wrote: post #14
rochak wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you looked into CircleCI?

I've used it in the past, but when they finally killed off the 1.0 builders (?) my company went to an "internally" hosted Jenkins[1] server and I haven't played with any of the 2.0 stuff. Have you? How do you find working with it? [1] I did also ask about selfhosted stuff, but I'm not willing to host Jenkins for myself. I've heard nothing but complaints about managing a Jenkins install. It's been fine as a user (if a…

I have been GitHub Actions ever since they released, but used to use TravisCI before that. There were one or two projects where I used CircleCI and it seemed more mature that TravisCI.

Re: Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

#144

Post by merb »

monkeybutton wrote: post #16
sounds wrote: post #8

Hey Jeff, This is hitting me hard, too. I hope this is the right moment for me to pipe up and say this: I always just do the minimum with these CI integrations to get my shell script to run. I am grateful for the free minutes they offer open source projects - but any of the deeper integrations, the advanced automation? No, thanks. It's not like the other developers who use what I write have any more motivation than I…

>do the minimum with these CI integrations to get my shell script to run This. 100%. Where I'm working is migrating from Bamboo to Jenkins. For my team the new process is just calling "./build-test $params" while others are stuck re-implementing various stages, tasks and blah blah blah. Also an added bonus to this is having the full history of changes to the CI/CD process tracked in git.

btw. even gitlab does that with their autodevops, besides that they create gitlab-runner:

https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/blob/master/lib/gitla... https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/blob/master/lib/gitla... https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/cluster-integration/auto-deplo...

I found these fascinating, I mean they still have lots of things in their ci file, but basically the have tons of shell scripts that would work without their gitlab-runner.

Not affiliated with gitlab I just tried to figure out how some of their stuff works to have the same k8s integration than their autodevops offers.

Re: Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

#145

Post by Havoc »

user5994461 wrote: post #113
Havoc wrote: post #95

But why move to another CI provide that will be under the same commercial pressures ultimately? (Handing out free compute is bad for profits). As someone pointed out here the other day. With build minutes as a concept they're inherently incentivized to keep old slow gear running as well. I reckon self-hosted gitlab is a good bet, but admittedly tricky for big FOSS projects that need to be public

Because it's easy to use, it works well, and when it doesn't there are 3 other competitors ready to take over. Travis CI could shutdown overnight, there's Circle CI and AppVeyor doing the exact same thing. They take pretty much the same configuration so there's nothing to adjust.

>and when it doesn't there are 3 other competitors ready to take over.

Apparently the transition is painful enough to warrant a sizable hn discussion though.

Re: Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

#146

Post by redis_mlc »

aprdm wrote: post #76
saurik wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't want something called "make.sh" to install tooling on the computer, though, and that is an important step of CI stuff.

Run it in a docker container so that it does the same in your computer and in the CI worker. make prepare make build make test make release Working the same waylocally and in jenkins makes things very easy. What it does is up to the team but make prepare usually pulls some docker image and install dependencies, make build builds something inside the docker image, make test runs test inside it and make release publish…

I think you missed the plot here.

make.sh is instead of Docker, CI workers, fancy stuff, etc. :)

It's for developers who care more about results than resume-padding.

Re: Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

#147

Post by laumars »

aprdm wrote: post #136
laumars wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Jenkins pipelines are written in Groovy and you do not need to use the web ui, everything is exposed via its API (i.e: new job creation). There's several ways you can codify Jenkins pipelines, Groovy being just one of them. But ultimately it's secondary to the main design of Jenkins. I'm not taking anything away from Jenkins as a solution - it has been invaluable over the years. But the way we write, test and deplo…

While you’re not wrong I do use jenkins inside docker and use ansible to configure it, it is a bit different than other more modern tools but works fine. I have yet to see other tools be as flexible (perforce , git, legacy tools, docker, 100s of workers across datacenters etc.)

I’m yet to see a CI/CD tool that can’t do all of that. What you’re describing there is the bare minimum I’d expect any CI/CD solution to do. I guess there might be some hobby platforms for indie devs but they’re not really the use case we are discussing when talking about Jenkins and Concourse.

Re: Travis CI's new pricing plan threw a wrench in my open source works

#148

Post by mike22 »

Joeri wrote: post #79
vosper wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> who also own Sencha who make Ext.js -- a pay-to-use JavaScript framework. I pity anyone who's paying for Ext.js (self-described as "The Best JavaScript Framework In The World"). That is some ancient shit right there. They must have some poor sods who're really, truly, stuck if they're managing to get people to pay for it. I guess at least you get support in your quagmire. But good luck finding quality developers wh…

I worked with extjs 2 and 3 for years and honestly productivity was as high or higher than angular or react. It was a game changer and allowed us to build things an order of magnitude faster than before. I really liked it. What it lacked was a good responsiveness story, and by the time they added that I was already gone, first to backbone and later to angular and react. The amount of vendor lock-in of Extjs is massiv…

I’m on my first gig involving front-end now, with ExtJS 3.4. A few years before I joined (was able to observe the team from a periphery) they tried using Sencha’s 3.x-to-4.0 migration tool, which left the app in a state still needing attention to every LoC. The post-Idera layoffs aren’t making 6.x look too attractive.
Post reply on HN