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

Moving Away from Travis CI

ropensci.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 79 posts

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#41

Post by stevekemp »

chrisseaton wrote: post #21
jniedrauer wrote: post #14

I'm surprised people are still using Travis CI. The writing was on the wall the day of the acquisition. I moved all of my builds immediately.

I work with an important open source project with large full-time professional and competent teams working on it... that had no idea .org as shutting down until a couple of weeks ago. Their messaging wasn't enough.

The parent was perhaps a little pessimistic, but I admit the moment I heard there was an acquisition I too assumed that things would change, and I also preemptively started moving my stuff away from them.

Happily I'd gotten into a habit of making sure my repositories were "self-contained" already, when I first started using self-hosted Travis (Hudson?) back in the day I did all the configuration in the UI, but soon realized I should keep the CI-system very simple and essentially run "make test", "make build", etc.

Having the actual test/build scripts inside the repositories means that a human could easily run the same things interactively, and that moving between CI-systems is painless. All you need to do is configure the appropriate location of the repository and enter the names of the appropriate scripts.

Even now my github actions assume that they can just run a script within the repository, for example the most basic one:

https://github.com/skx/github-action-tester

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#42

Post by scrollaway »

hendry wrote: post #32

It's a shame that we are beating a path to another Microsoft monopoly. Have we learned nothing?

When time comes, we will move away from GitHub actions too.

What will you have us do, in the mean time? Will you pay to run my open source projects' CI servers?

And if you do, what exactly makes you better than "another Microsoft monopoly"?

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#43

Post by Karunamon »

This makes me wonder what Travis' endgame here is. When Github and Gitlab, the two sites that account for the vast majority of OSS development, offer free CI, who's their target market? Enterprise? They already use Jenkins or Bamboo (or Github Enterprise or Gitlab self hosted).

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#44

Post by anon73044 »

jacques_chester wrote: post #35
jniedrauer wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you host concourse? Did you adopt their entire stack? Last time I looked at it, it seemed cool but I had no interest in learning BOSH.

Kubernetes deployments overtook BOSH deployments in the last Concourse community survey: https://blog.concourse-ci.org/community-survey-2020-results/... I suspect that support for the BOSH deployment will eventually be discontinued. Disclosure: I work for VMware, which sponsors Concourse. My own views.

Been using PKS for almost all of this year at work and it feels very much like 'the writing is on the wall'.

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#45

Post by Spivak »

cube00 wrote: post #40

> The native integration with GitHub this takes away the annoying authentication dance that is required for third party services. We really need to improve the "annoying authentication" so this doesn't become a reason to continue building silos with a single vendor.

The issue is that this is one of those things that’s a direct trade-off between ease of use and security. The smoothest authentication is “this

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#46

Post by hinkley »

Waterluvian wrote: post #5
cghendrix wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely look at Jenkins. You can do pretty much whatever you want with it (not always a good thing though of course, use responsibly)

Jenkins is powerful and painfully complex. You might need that complexity for large projects but personally I've found it to be so frustrating to set up simple stuff.

As we discussed in a previous thread, the features tend to become a trap of lock-in.

Often better to have your scripts do most of the work and the build tool handle triggers, bookkeeping, and some statistics.

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#48

Post by koolba »

chrisseaton wrote: post #21
jniedrauer wrote: post #14

I'm surprised people are still using Travis CI. The writing was on the wall the day of the acquisition. I moved all of my builds immediately.

I work with an important open source project with large full-time professional and competent teams working on it... that had no idea .org as shutting down until a couple of weeks ago. Their messaging wasn't enough.

I didn’t know till I read this blog post.

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#49

Post by philihp »

cortesoft wrote: post #47
jniedrauer wrote: post #14

I'm surprised people are still using Travis CI. The writing was on the wall the day of the acquisition. I moved all of my builds immediately.

My company was using it on 400+ repos, it isn't like we could just migrate the next day.

I’ll bet/hope 80% of them were simple and static libraries without any mono-repo nonsense.

Re: Moving Away from Travis CI

#50

Post by philihp »

Karunamon wrote: post #43

This makes me wonder what Travis' endgame here is. When Github and Gitlab, the two sites that account for the vast majority of OSS development, offer free CI, who's their target market? Enterprise? They already use Jenkins or Bamboo (or Github Enterprise or Gitlab self hosted).

Probably cut costs and hope enough of the revenue sticks around until they’re profitable. GitHub Actions is a relative newcomer to the party, but they probably have the better pricing structure here, charging by the minute.
Post reply on HN