4 ms·

> instead of stealing TravisCIs ideas (cough GitHub Actions Cough) Not sure how you come to that conclusion. Even _if_ that were true, that would probably be a

> instead of stealing TravisCIs ideas (cough GitHub Actions Cough) Not sure how you come to that conclusion. Even _if_ that were true, that would probably be a good thing now that TravisCI is on life support.

alvern 7y ago
Forgive my ignorance, but how is TravisCI on lifesupport? Is this because Idera aquired them?
- nicoburns 7y ago
  It seems very flaky to me. We're currently migrating off Travis (probably to Azure pipelines) at my workplace.
- jen20 7y ago
  They fired many of their developers and key operations folks, and service has been flaky for months. It was already poor, but is now substantially worse than almost all of the competition.
- jrochkind1 7y ago
  They were purchased by a private equity company. Which does not usually mean any continued development. At it's best, it means keep the thing running well and continue to wring revenue out of it. But few and far between are the private equity purchases that are at their best. It also almost always means significant cost cutting. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18978251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18978251
  - hobofan 7y ago
    It's not just any private equity company, but one that is known for purchasing companies with a big subscriber base and then getting as much money out of them with the least effort.
tbrock 7y ago
In my experience CircleCI is an excellent alternative.
- danpalmer 7y ago
  In my experience CircleCI feels like an excellent alternative for the first few weeks/month, until you realise all the missing features, unreliability, and issues, at which point you contact support and find their support is very poor and mostly just ask you to go and "vote" for which bugfixes you want to see on their community site, where product ideas go to die.
  - dvlsg 7y ago
    Which features were missing for you with CircleCI? My experience with CircleCI has been almost entirely positive so far.
    - danpalmer 7y ago
      We use them for continuous delivery, but there is no way to serialise a deployment. This is pretty critical to not shipping the wrong code at the wrong time – like shipping code that uses new database fields before the database migration to add them. There is a third party orb that attempts to do this, but it costs significant numbers of build credits to run as it implements queueing of builds as busy-waiting, plus we've got evidence that there are bugs in it as we have seen out of order deployments. It's very difficult or near impossible to build edge-triggered features based on build states. We want to be able to notify when the build goes red, notify for every red build, and notify when it goes green again, and just for the master/deployed branch. This is not possible (you either get all builds or no builds). There is again a third party orb that implements some of this, but it's pretty inflexible. We've had them remove features we were sold on. Not huge features, but we were told their billing worked one way, budgeted for it, and then they changed that because they couldn't get it to work correctly. They didn't tell us about this, except for just failing our builds as we were under provisioned on users. Their support takes on average around 2 working days to respond, and often requires chasing to get a response. Once they do respond it's typically a fairly shallow response without much information, or that has misunderstood the issue, and so queries often take multiple rounds to get help on. They sell a premium support package, but that is pitched as more about helping you to use the service better and I have an objection to paying for support in getting the service to work in the way it should.
edaemon 7y ago
That sentence seemed particularly strange considering GitHub Actions is pretty openly based on Azure DevOps, which makes sense considering GitHub's owner. Actions bears little resemblance to Travis.

alvern 7y ago

Forgive my ignorance, but how is TravisCI on lifesupport? Is this because Idera aquired them?

nicoburns 7y ago
It seems very flaky to me. We're currently migrating off Travis (probably to Azure pipelines) at my workplace.
jen20 7y ago
They fired many of their developers and key operations folks, and service has been flaky for months. It was already poor, but is now substantially worse than almost all of the competition.
jrochkind1 7y ago
They were purchased by a private equity company. Which does not usually mean any continued development. At it's best, it means keep the thing running well and continue to wring revenue out of it. But few and far between are the private equity purchases that are at their best. It also almost always means significant cost cutting. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18978251 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18978251
- hobofan 7y ago
  It's not just any private equity company, but one that is known for purchasing companies with a big subscriber base and then getting as much money out of them with the least effort.

tbrock 7y ago

In my experience CircleCI is an excellent alternative.

danpalmer 7y ago
In my experience CircleCI feels like an excellent alternative for the first few weeks/month, until you realise all the missing features, unreliability, and issues, at which point you contact support and find their support is very poor and mostly just ask you to go and "vote" for which bugfixes you want to see on their community site, where product ideas go to die.
- dvlsg 7y ago
  Which features were missing for you with CircleCI? My experience with CircleCI has been almost entirely positive so far.
  - danpalmer 7y ago
    We use them for continuous delivery, but there is no way to serialise a deployment. This is pretty critical to not shipping the wrong code at the wrong time – like shipping code that uses new database fields before the database migration to add them. There is a third party orb that attempts to do this, but it costs significant numbers of build credits to run as it implements queueing of builds as busy-waiting, plus we've got evidence that there are bugs in it as we have seen out of order deployments. It's very difficult or near impossible to build edge-triggered features based on build states. We want to be able to notify when the build goes red, notify for every red build, and notify when it goes green again, and just for the master/deployed branch. This is not possible (you either get all builds or no builds). There is again a third party orb that implements some of this, but it's pretty inflexible. We've had them remove features we were sold on. Not huge features, but we were told their billing worked one way, budgeted for it, and then they changed that because they couldn't get it to work correctly. They didn't tell us about this, except for just failing our builds as we were under provisioned on users. Their support takes on average around 2 working days to respond, and often requires chasing to get a response. Once they do respond it's typically a fairly shallow response without much information, or that has misunderstood the issue, and so queries often take multiple rounds to get help on. They sell a premium support package, but that is pitched as more about helping you to use the service better and I have an objection to paying for support in getting the service to work in the way it should.

edaemon 7y ago

That sentence seemed particularly strange considering GitHub Actions is pretty openly based on Azure DevOps, which makes sense considering GitHub's owner. Actions bears little resemblance to Travis.