Get Advice Icon

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

AWS CodeCommit
AWS CodeCommit

135
129
+ 1
179
Travis CI
Travis CI

4.4K
3.1K
+ 1
1.7K
Add tool

AWS CodeCommit vs Travis CI: What are the differences?

What is AWS CodeCommit? Fully-managed source control service that makes it easy for companies to host secure and highly scalable private Git repositories. CodeCommit eliminates the need to operate your own source control system or worry about scaling its infrastructure. You can use CodeCommit to securely store anything from source code to binaries, and it works seamlessly with your existing Git tools.

What is Travis CI? A hosted continuous integration service for open source and private projects. 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.

AWS CodeCommit and Travis CI are primarily classified as "Code Collaboration & Version Control" and "Continuous Integration" tools respectively.

Some of the features offered by AWS CodeCommit are:

  • Collaboration
  • Encryption
  • Access Control

On the other hand, Travis CI provides the following key features:

  • 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.

"Free private repos" is the top reason why over 39 developers like AWS CodeCommit, while over 505 developers mention "Github integration" as the leading cause for choosing Travis CI.

Lyft, Heroku, and Rainist are some of the popular companies that use Travis CI, whereas AWS CodeCommit is used by iMedicare, Complete Business Online, and Sidecar Interactive. Travis CI has a broader approval, being mentioned in 670 company stacks & 625 developers stacks; compared to AWS CodeCommit, which is listed in 25 company stacks and 17 developer stacks.

- No public GitHub repository available -
- No public GitHub repository available -

What is AWS CodeCommit?

CodeCommit eliminates the need to operate your own source control system or worry about scaling its infrastructure. You can use CodeCommit to securely store anything from source code to binaries, and it works seamlessly with your existing Git tools.

What is Travis CI?

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.
Get Advice Icon

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Why do developers choose AWS CodeCommit?
Why do developers choose Travis CI?

Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions

Sign up to add, upvote and see more consMake informed product decisions

What companies use AWS CodeCommit?
What companies use Travis CI?

Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

What tools integrate with AWS CodeCommit?
What tools integrate with Travis CI?

Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

What are some alternatives to AWS CodeCommit and Travis CI?
GitHub
GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together.
GitLab
GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers.
Bitbucket
Bitbucket gives teams one place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private Git repositories. Teams choose Bitbucket because it has a superior Jira integration, built-in CI/CD, & is free for up to 5 users.
GitHub Enterprise
GitHub Enterprise lets developers use the tools they love across the development process with support for popular IDEs, continuous integration tools, and hundreds of third party apps and services.
SVN (Subversion)
Subversion exists to be universally recognized and adopted as an open-source, centralized version control system characterized by its reliability as a safe haven for valuable data; the simplicity of its model and usage; and its ability to support the needs of a wide variety of users and projects, from individuals to large-scale enterprise operations.
See all alternatives
Decisions about AWS CodeCommit and Travis CI
Jesus Dario Rivera Rubio
Jesus Dario Rivera Rubio
Telecomm Engineering at Netbeast | 10 upvotes 131K views
atNetbeastNetbeast
Mailjet
Mailjet
Intercom
Intercom
Amplitude
Amplitude
Firebase
Firebase
GitHub
GitHub
Bitrise
Bitrise
Travis CI
Travis CI
Objective-C
Objective-C
Android SDK
Android SDK
React Native
React Native
#End2end
#SmartHome

We are using React Native in #SmartHome to share the business logic between Android and iOS team and approach users with a unique brand experience. The drawback is that we require lots of native Android SDK and Objective-C modules, so a good part of the invested time is there. The gain for a app that relies less on native communication, sensors and OS tools should be even higher.

Also it helps us set different testing stages: we use Travis CI for the javascript (business logic), Bitrise to run build tests and @Detox for #end2end automated user tests.

We use a microservices structure on top of Zeit's @now that read from firebase. We use JWT auth to authenticate requests among services and from users, following GitHub philosophy of using the same infrastructure than its API consumers. Firebase is used mainly as a key-value store between services and as a backup database for users. We also use its authentication mechanisms.

You can be super locked-in if you also rely on it's analytics, but we use Amplitude for that, which offers us great insights. Intercom for communications with end-user and Mailjet for marketing.

See more
Travis CI
Travis CI
CircleCI
CircleCI

I initially chose CircleCI for a personal project because I was not satisified with using Travis CI in the past. When it came time to develop my CI/CD config on Circle, I was pleasantly surprised with the fantastic documentation, invaluable collection of example configs and helpful support provided. The free tier they provide is quite robust for most small projects and the platform is updated frequently with nice features.

Areas where CircleCI could improve:

  • the UI is a bit slow (you can feel the local machine straining to load all the code) and it is not as intuitive as it could be
  • many UI elements receive updates and/or changes that are not always reflected in the current docs
See more
GitHub
GitHub
Appveyor
Appveyor
Travis CI
Travis CI

I recommend using Travis CI and/or Appveyor in all projects.

Projects using these tools have given me confidence to know that I don't cause any breaking changes. Travis CI and Appveyor have functionality to test components of a project across multiple installation projects to ensure that modifications don't break a project. These tools integrate easily with GitHub and are useful in open source projects that must review contributions from many different people.

See more
Tim Abbott
Tim Abbott
Founder at Zulip | 12 upvotes 34.4K views
atZulipZulip
CircleCI
CircleCI
Travis CI
Travis CI

We actually started out on Travis CI, but we've migrated our main builds to CircleCI, and it's been a huge improvement.

The reason it's been a huge improvement is that Travis CI has a fundamentally bad design for their images, where they start with a standard base Linux image containing tons of packages (several versions of postgres, every programming language environment, etc). This is potentially nice for the "get builds for a small project running quickly" use case, but it's a total disaster for a larger project that needs a decent number of dependencies and cares about the performance and reliability of their build.

This issue is exacerbated by their networking infrastructure being unreliable; we usually saw over 1% of builds failing due to transient networking errors in Travis CI, even after we added retries to the most frequently failing operations like apt update or pip install. And they never install Ubuntu's point release updates to their images. So doing an apt update, apt install, or especially apt upgrade would take forever. We ended up writing code to actually uninstall many of their base packages and pin the versions of hundreds of others to get a semi-fast, semi-reliable build. It was infuriating.

The CircleCI v2.0 system has the right design for a CI system: we can customize the base image to start with any expensive-to-install packages we need for our build, and we can update that image if and when we want to. The end result is that when migrating, we were able to delete all the hacky optimizations mentioned above, while still ending up with a 50% faster build latency. And we've also had 5-10x fewer issues with networking-related flakes, which means one doesn't have to constantly check whether a build failure is actually due to an issue with the code under test or "just another networking flake".

See more
Travis CI
Travis CI
CircleCI
CircleCI
Google Cloud Build
Google Cloud Build

I use Google Cloud Build because it's my first foray into the CICD world(loving it so far), and I wanted to work with something GCP native to avoid giving permissions to other SaaS tools like CircleCI and Travis CI.

I really like it because it's free for the first 120 minutes, and it's one of the few CICD tools that enterprises are open to using since it's contained within GCP.

One of the unique things is that it has the Kaniko cache, which speeds up builds by creating intermediate layers within the docker image vs. pushing the full thing from the start. Helpful when you're installing just a few additional dependencies.

Feel free to checkout an example: Cloudbuild Example

See more
Interest over time
Reviews of AWS CodeCommit and Travis CI
Avatar of tschellenbach
CEO at Stream
Review ofTravis CITravis CI

In the past we used to run Jenkins. The build server always had weird issues and was a pain to maintain. Travis is a great solution for CI. Their Debug build features makes it trivial to figure out why your build broke. The integration with Github is also very slick. One thing they could improve is the documentation on the .travis.yaml format. All in all, great company and very responsive supports. Over here at getstream.io we're a fan. Keep up the good work guys!

Avatar of AnakinPt
Lead Engineer at Fineos
Review ofAWS CodeCommitAWS CodeCommit

The pull requests are only merged by FF what makes all the merges hard to manage. The IAM configuration is very awkward and the unavailability to add git hooks to prevent commits to be made into the server makes this tool not much usable for a software development company.

How developers use AWS CodeCommit and Travis CI
Avatar of datapile
datapile uses Travis CITravis CI

Travis CI is our pillar for automated deployment, pull request testing, auto-merging (for non-mission-critical projects), and build testing per commit / release.

It is highly configurable, super cheap, and extremely robust (supports every language and configuration we've thrown at it).

Avatar of P膿teris Caune
P膿teris Caune uses Travis CITravis CI

While we usually run tests before commits, Travis goes further and tests with different Python versions and different database backends. It works great, and, best of all, it is free for open source projects.

Avatar of Volkan 脰z莽elik
Volkan 脰z莽elik uses AWS CodeCommitAWS CodeCommit

I use CodeCommit for projects that require a tighter integration with the AWS ecosystem.

Otherwise, my default source control system as a service of choice is: GitHub.

Avatar of Dieter Adriaenssens
Dieter Adriaenssens uses Travis CITravis CI

Travis CI builds and tests every commit. It's also used to deploy Buildtime Trend as a Service to Heroku and the Buildtime Trend Python library to the PyPi repository.

Avatar of Nate Ferrell
Nate Ferrell uses Travis CITravis CI

Travis CI is critical for Linux and macOS CI tests for the Powershell module. Travis runs the same tests we run in AppVeyor in parallel.

Avatar of Andrew Williams
Andrew Williams uses Travis CITravis CI

To ensure that what works locally will also work for someone else. Also used to send code coverage to codeintel

How much does AWS CodeCommit cost?
How much does Travis CI cost?
News about AWS CodeCommit
More news