Coveralls vs Travis CI

Overview

Travis CI

Stacks28.0K

Followers6.7K

Votes1.7K

Coveralls

Stacks1.7K

Followers278

Votes68

Coveralls vs Travis CI: What are the differences?

Introduction

In the world of continuous integration and code coverage tools, Coveralls and Travis CI are two popular choices. However, they each have distinct features and functionalities that set them apart.

Integration with Multiple Programming Languages: Coveralls primarily focuses on providing code coverage analysis for various programming languages such as Ruby, JavaScript, Python, and more, while Travis CI is a continuous integration tool that supports a wide range of programming languages for automated testing and deployment.
Supported Integrations: Travis CI has a vast ecosystem of integrations with popular services like GitHub, Bitbucket, Slack, and more, allowing for seamless integration and easy setup with these platforms. In contrast, Coveralls has fewer integrations but is highly focused on providing in-depth code coverage metrics.
Focus on Code Coverage: Coveralls heavily emphasizes providing detailed code coverage reports to help developers identify areas of their codebase with low test coverage, while Travis CI is more focused on automating builds, running tests, and facilitating deployment processes.
Pricing Model: The pricing structure of Coveralls is based on the number of repositories and users, with additional charges for premium features, whereas Travis CI offers a free tier for open-source projects with paid plans based on concurrency and parallel builds for private repositories.
Ease of Use: Travis CI is known for its user-friendly interface and intuitive setup process, making it a popular choice for developers looking to quickly integrate continuous integration into their workflows. Coveralls also offers a straightforward setup process but may require additional configuration for specific languages and frameworks.
Community Support and Documentation: Travis CI has a strong community of users and comprehensive documentation, making it easier for developers to troubleshoot issues and seek assistance, while Coveralls, although resourceful, may have a smaller community presence and documentation.

In Summary, Coveralls and Travis CI offer distinct features and functionalities tailored towards code coverage analysis and continuous integration, respectively, catering to the diverse needs of developers in managing and improving their software development workflows.

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, Coveralls

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?"

530k views530k

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	Coveralls
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.	Coveralls works with your CI server and sifts through your coverage data to find issues you didn't even know you had before they become a problem. Free for open source, pro accounts for private repos, instant sign up with GitHub OAuth.
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.	Repository Coverage Statistics;Individual File Coverage Reports;Line By Line Coverage;Repository Overview
Statistics
Stacks 28.0K	Stacks 1.7K
Followers 6.7K	Followers 278
Votes 1.7K	Votes 68
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 Feature lacking 3 Unstable 2 Incomplete documentation for all platforms	Pros 45 Free for public repositories 13 Code coverage 7 Ease of integration 2 More stable than Codecov 1 Combines coverage from multiple/parallel test runs
Integrations
Amazon S3 Heroku AWS CodeDeploy MySQL Red Hat OpenShift Nodejitsu npm GitHub Engine Yard Cloud cloudControl	CircleCI Semaphore Jenkins Codeship

What are some alternatives to Travis CI, Coveralls?

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.

Buildkite

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.

Codecov

Our patrons rave about our elegant coverage reports, integrated pull request comments, interactive commit graphs, our Chrome plugin and security.

Related Comparisons

Coveralls vs Travis CI: What are the differences?

Introduction

In the world of continuous integration and code coverage tools, Coveralls and Travis CI are two popular choices. However, they each have distinct features and functionalities that set them apart.

Integration with Multiple Programming Languages: Coveralls primarily focuses on providing code coverage analysis for various programming languages such as Ruby, JavaScript, Python, and more, while Travis CI is a continuous integration tool that supports a wide range of programming languages for automated testing and deployment.
Supported Integrations: Travis CI has a vast ecosystem of integrations with popular services like GitHub, Bitbucket, Slack, and more, allowing for seamless integration and easy setup with these platforms. In contrast, Coveralls has fewer integrations but is highly focused on providing in-depth code coverage metrics.
Focus on Code Coverage: Coveralls heavily emphasizes providing detailed code coverage reports to help developers identify areas of their codebase with low test coverage, while Travis CI is more focused on automating builds, running tests, and facilitating deployment processes.
Pricing Model: The pricing structure of Coveralls is based on the number of repositories and users, with additional charges for premium features, whereas Travis CI offers a free tier for open-source projects with paid plans based on concurrency and parallel builds for private repositories.
Ease of Use: Travis CI is known for its user-friendly interface and intuitive setup process, making it a popular choice for developers looking to quickly integrate continuous integration into their workflows. Coveralls also offers a straightforward setup process but may require additional configuration for specific languages and frameworks.
Community Support and Documentation: Travis CI has a strong community of users and comprehensive documentation, making it easier for developers to troubleshoot issues and seek assistance, while Coveralls, although resourceful, may have a smaller community presence and documentation.

Coveralls vs Travis CI

Overview

Coveralls vs Travis CI: What are the differences?