Buildkite vs Travis CI

Overview

Travis CI

Stacks28.0K

Followers6.7K

Votes1.7K

Buildkite

Stacks210

Followers231

Votes115

Buildkite vs Travis CI: What are the differences?

Key Differences Between Buildkite and Travis CI

Pricing Model: Buildkite offers a more flexible pricing model where you pay based on the number of concurrent builds, allowing teams to scale up or down as needed. In comparison, Travis CI has fixed pricing tiers based on the number of concurrent jobs, which may be less cost-effective for smaller teams or projects with fluctuating workload.
Customization and Control: Buildkite provides more control and customization options for managing pipelines, including the ability to define custom scripts and use Docker images. On the other hand, Travis CI has a more opinionated approach and may offer less flexibility in configuring build processes.
Configuration File: Buildkite uses a YAML configuration file for defining pipelines and build steps, allowing for more complex configurations and conditions. Travis CI also supports YAML configuration but has a more standardized format, which may be easier for beginners but less flexible for advanced users.
Agent Architecture: Buildkite uses a scalable agent architecture where agents can run on any machine, offering more distributed and scalable build capacity. In contrast, Travis CI relies on predefined build environments managed by the service, which may limit customization and scalability options.
Integrations and Ecosystem: Buildkite has a strong focus on integrations with popular dev tools and services, allowing for seamless workflow automation and collaboration. While Travis CI also supports integrations, it may have fewer options or require additional setup to achieve the same level of integration.
Support and Documentation: Buildkite offers personalized support and detailed documentation, making it easier for users to troubleshoot issues and optimize their CI/CD workflows. Travis CI has a larger user base and community support, providing more resources for common problems but potentially less personalized assistance.

In Summary, Buildkite and Travis CI differ in pricing, customization, configuration, agent architecture, integrations, and support offerings.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on Travis CI, Buildkite

Felipe

May 24, 2020

Needs advice

My website is brand new and one of the few requirements of testings I had to implement was code coverage. Never though it was so hard to implement using a #docker container.
Given my lack of experience, every attempt I tried on making a simple code coverage test using the 4 combinations of #TravisCI, #CircleCi with #Coveralls, #Codecov I failed. The main problem was I was generating the .coverage file within the docker container and couldn't access it with #TravisCi or #CircleCi, every attempt to solve this problem seems to be very hacky and this was not the kind of complexity I want to introduce to my newborn website.
This problem was solved using a specific action for #GitHubActions, it was a 3 line solution I had to put in my github workflow file and I was able to access the .coverage file from my docker container and get the coverage report with #Codecov.

198k views198k

Comments

StackShare

Apr 17, 2019

Needs advice

From a StackShare Community member: "Currently we use Travis CI and have optimized it as much as we can so our builds are fairly quick. Our boss is all about redundancy so we are looking for another solution to fall back on in case Travis goes down and/or jacks prices way up (they were recently acquired). Could someone recommend which CI we should go with and if they have time, an explanation of how they're different?"

529k views529k

Comments

Tatiana

Nov 16, 2019

Decided

Jenkins is a pretty flexible, complete tool. Especially I love the possibility to configure jobs as a code with Jenkins pipelines.

CircleCI is well suited for small projects where the main task is to run continuous integration as quickly as possible. Travis CI is recommended primarily for open-source projects that need to be tested in different environments.

And for something a bit larger I prefer to use Jenkins because it is possible to make serious system configuration thereby different plugins. In Jenkins, I can change almost anything. But if you want to start the CI chain as soon as possible, Jenkins may not be the right choice.

734k views734k

Comments

Detailed Comparison

Travis CI	Buildkite
Free for open source projects, our CI environment provides multiple runtimes (e.g. Node.js or PHP versions), data stores and so on. Because of this, hosting your project on travis-ci.com means you can effortlessly test your library or applications against multiple runtimes and data stores without even having all of them installed locally.	CI and build automation tool that combines the power of your own build infrastructure with the convenience of a managed, centralized web UI. Used by Shopify, Basecamp, Digital Ocean, Venmo, Cochlear, Bugsnag and more.
Easy Setup- Getting started with Travis CI is as easy as enabling a project, adding basic build instructions to your project and committing code.;Supports Your Platform- Lots of databases and services are pre-installed and can simply be enabled in your build configuration, we'll launch them for you automatically. MySQL, PostgreSQL, ElasticSearch, Redis, Riak, RabbitMQ, Memcached are available by default.;Deploy With Confidence- Deploying to production after a successful build is as easy as setting up a bit of configuration, and we'll deploy your code to Heroku, Engine Yard Cloud, Nodejitsu, cloudControl, OpenShift, and CloudFoundry.	Fast and stable builds; Open source agent runs on almost any machine and architecture; Freedom to use your own internal or pre-release tools and services; Powerful distributed build tools; Key/value targeting of agents; Dynamic job allocation allows adding and removing build machines; Shared key/value and binary artifact stores for easily distributing build jobs regardless of machine or network; Integration with pull requests, deployments and releases; GitHub, Github Enterprise, Bitbucket, Gitlab or your own SCM; Slack, Hipchat, Webhooks, and LIFX notifications; Extensible per-project with agent hooks, webhooks and the rest API; GitHub Enterprise is supported standard; SSO
Statistics
Stacks 28.0K	Stacks 210
Followers 6.7K	Followers 231
Votes 1.7K	Votes 115
Pros & Cons
Pros 506 Github integration 388 Free for open source 271 Easy to get started 191 Nice interface 162 Automatic deployment Cons 8 Can't be hosted insternally 3 Unstable 3 Feature lacking 2 Incomplete documentation for all platforms	Pros 18 Great customer support 17 Github integration 16 Easy setup 16 Easy to use 12 Simplicity
Integrations
Amazon S3 Heroku AWS CodeDeploy MySQL Red Hat OpenShift Nodejitsu npm GitHub Engine Yard Cloud cloudControl	Slack GitHub Docker GitLab Heroku HipChat Bitbucket Git GitHub Enterprise TestFlight

What are some alternatives to Travis CI, Buildkite?

Jenkins

In a nutshell Jenkins CI is the leading open-source continuous integration server. Built with Java, it provides over 300 plugins to support building and testing virtually any project.

Codeship

Codeship runs your automated tests and configured deployment when you push to your repository. It takes care of managing and scaling the infrastructure so that you are able to test and release more frequently and get faster feedback for building the product your users need.

CircleCI

Continuous integration and delivery platform helps software teams rapidly release code with confidence by automating the build, test, and deploy process. Offers a modern software development platform that lets teams ramp.

TeamCity

TeamCity is a user-friendly continuous integration (CI) server for professional developers, build engineers, and DevOps. It is trivial to setup and absolutely free for small teams and open source projects.

Drone.io

Drone is a hosted continuous integration service. It enables you to conveniently set up projects to automatically build, test, and deploy as you make changes to your code. Drone integrates seamlessly with Github, Bitbucket and Google Code as well as third party services such as Heroku, Dotcloud, Google AppEngine and more.

wercker

Wercker is a CI/CD developer automation platform designed for Microservices & Container Architecture.

GoCD

GoCD is an open source continuous delivery server created by ThoughtWorks. GoCD offers business a first-class build and deployment engine for complete control and visibility.

Shippable

Shippable is a SaaS platform that lets you easily add Continuous Integration/Deployment to your Github and BitBucket repositories. It is lightweight, super simple to setup, and runs your builds and tests faster than any other service.

Snap CI

Snap CI is a cloud-based continuous integration & continuous deployment tool with powerful deployment pipelines. Integrates seamlessly with GitHub and provides fast feedback so you can deploy with ease.

Appveyor

AppVeyor aims to give powerful Continuous Integration and Deployment tools to every .NET developer without the hassle of setting up and maintaining their own build server.

Related Comparisons

Buildkite vs Travis CI: What are the differences?

Key Differences Between Buildkite and Travis CI

Pricing Model: Buildkite offers a more flexible pricing model where you pay based on the number of concurrent builds, allowing teams to scale up or down as needed. In comparison, Travis CI has fixed pricing tiers based on the number of concurrent jobs, which may be less cost-effective for smaller teams or projects with fluctuating workload.
Customization and Control: Buildkite provides more control and customization options for managing pipelines, including the ability to define custom scripts and use Docker images. On the other hand, Travis CI has a more opinionated approach and may offer less flexibility in configuring build processes.
Configuration File: Buildkite uses a YAML configuration file for defining pipelines and build steps, allowing for more complex configurations and conditions. Travis CI also supports YAML configuration but has a more standardized format, which may be easier for beginners but less flexible for advanced users.
Agent Architecture: Buildkite uses a scalable agent architecture where agents can run on any machine, offering more distributed and scalable build capacity. In contrast, Travis CI relies on predefined build environments managed by the service, which may limit customization and scalability options.
Integrations and Ecosystem: Buildkite has a strong focus on integrations with popular dev tools and services, allowing for seamless workflow automation and collaboration. While Travis CI also supports integrations, it may have fewer options or require additional setup to achieve the same level of integration.
Support and Documentation: Buildkite offers personalized support and detailed documentation, making it easier for users to troubleshoot issues and optimize their CI/CD workflows. Travis CI has a larger user base and community support, providing more resources for common problems but potentially less personalized assistance.

In Summary, Buildkite and Travis CI differ in pricing, customization, configuration, agent architecture, integrations, and support offerings.

Buildkite vs Travis CI

Overview

Buildkite vs Travis CI: What are the differences?