> I really don't know what else GitHub would be missing from the overall process of checking in code.
CI as-a-service is a massive undertaking, and requires different focus from what GitHub is currently doing. Three main differences are
1) lots and lots of devops. You have to support dozens of ruby, python, php versions. You have to support the version that Heroku uses, the one that EY uses, the one that AppFog uses. Same with databases. Then you have to somehow deal with the fact that gems that compile on Ubuntu 10.04 don't compile on Ubuntu 12.04
2) Then you have to make all of the above fast. We (I'm one of the founders of CircleCI https://circleci.com) spent months improving build speed, to make a compelling product. People don't pay for build results that take longer than their laptop can provide.
3) CI-aaS is high touch. A large percentage of new users will have lots of support in their first month. We don't track this stat yet, but Jason Cohen (founder of WPEngine) does, and his customers require 4x the support in their first month , compared to existing users.
3) Doing this well costs (and is worth) more than git hosting. It'd be a little strange for GitHub to buy a CI product, and then charge 2-10x for CI what they do for github.
4) GitHub has released multiple OSS CI products, and their employees have told me they don't think it makes sense to do hosted CI.
So I'm not holding my breath for an acquisition. But in the meantime, you can start testing on CircleCI today.
Hello, I cannot easily find your pricing page. This is a non-starter when trying to convince our org to use CircleCI. Am I blind? Need this info before I can move forward.
You're right, sorry. This is a technical limitation for now (the inner and outer are separate apps). We're merging them real soon now. We start at $20/month for one project and scale up from there. We offer bigger plans for more projects, more concurrent builds, and auto-parallelization.
CI as-a-service is a massive undertaking, and requires different focus from what GitHub is currently doing. Three main differences are
1) lots and lots of devops. You have to support dozens of ruby, python, php versions. You have to support the version that Heroku uses, the one that EY uses, the one that AppFog uses. Same with databases. Then you have to somehow deal with the fact that gems that compile on Ubuntu 10.04 don't compile on Ubuntu 12.04
2) Then you have to make all of the above fast. We (I'm one of the founders of CircleCI https://circleci.com) spent months improving build speed, to make a compelling product. People don't pay for build results that take longer than their laptop can provide.
3) CI-aaS is high touch. A large percentage of new users will have lots of support in their first month. We don't track this stat yet, but Jason Cohen (founder of WPEngine) does, and his customers require 4x the support in their first month , compared to existing users.
3) Doing this well costs (and is worth) more than git hosting. It'd be a little strange for GitHub to buy a CI product, and then charge 2-10x for CI what they do for github.
4) GitHub has released multiple OSS CI products, and their employees have told me they don't think it makes sense to do hosted CI.
So I'm not holding my breath for an acquisition. But in the meantime, you can start testing on CircleCI today.