Skip to content

Adding BitBucket support #667

Closed
KOLANICH opened this Issue Aug 16, 2012 · 218 comments
@KOLANICH

Hello.
It will be very good to have BitBucket support added.

@michaelklishin

Sorry, no immediate plans to do so.

@joshk
Travis CI member
joshk commented Aug 16, 2012

Well, the full explanation is that we do have this on our radar but the changes would be very very extensive.

We don't have a timeline for this, nor even confirmation it will go ahead.

Thanks for logging the issue, but it is best to close it for now. Sorry.

@djc
djc commented Nov 30, 2012

Can you elaborate on what the issues are? I might be interested into hacking on code around this. It seems like just pulling repositories from Bitbucket wouldn't be that hard. We could leave authentication to not-Github out of the picture for now.

@roidrage
Travis CI member

@djc indeed just adapting the checkout itself shouldn't be that hard. but we'll need support for Bitbuckets push payload and we need to have a way to synchronize a user's repositories and permissions to them, which is what Travis' user interface is built around. There's unfortunately a lot more involved than meets the eye, but if you're interested in hacking on that, by all means, go for it! :)

@djc
djc commented Nov 30, 2012

Can you give an indication of what the relevant areas of the codebase are?

@svenfuchs
Travis CI member

travis-listener accepts events from Github and queues them up to rabbitmq. they are going to be picked up by apps that use service classes in travis-core.

i think a good start might be to look at travis-core and find occurrences of "Github" and "GH"

@gcmalloc gcmalloc referenced this issue in rg3/youtube-dl Dec 13, 2012
Closed

We need to move out of GH Downloads #589

@Potherca

I'd be interested in this too. I don't really have the time (or any experience with ruby) to contribute but maybe the good folks over at Atlassian could be persuaded to put some time into this as it would benefit their product (BitBucket) to. Sadly I don't really know anyone over there...

@rkh
Travis CI member
rkh commented Jan 30, 2013

The bigger issue would be that we rely on GitHub completely for user management, access control etc. I think even if all the parts in the code base would be isolated, having a single instance that serves both GitHub and BitBucket. Though if the user management etc do get abstracted and reimplemented for BitBucket, I think it wouldn't be to hard to have a second instance running. I don't think Atlasssian would be interested in contributing to Travis CI, as they have their own proprietary alternative.

Long story short: We'd love this feature, but don't have the resources to add it.

@ssbarnea
ssbarnea commented Apr 9, 2013

👍 ...for reconsidering this in the future.

@zconkle
zconkle commented Apr 14, 2013

Would love to see support for bitbucket added. We use Jira and use bitbucket because it integrates heavily with the atlassian product suite. As an enterprise we are definitely open to a paid, hosted solution.

@jmagnusson

Please do consider this. Github is only one of many DVCS services available.

@jplehmann

+1

@ottsch
ottsch commented May 27, 2013

+1

@glarrain

+1

@benburton

+1

@estin
estin commented May 29, 2013

+1

@rwgrier
rwgrier commented May 30, 2013

+1

@davidwesst

+1

@Mulkave
Mulkave commented Jun 3, 2013

+1

@teozkr
teozkr commented Jun 3, 2013

+1

@roidrage
Travis CI member
roidrage commented Jun 4, 2013

We appreciate your +1 on this, but at this point we can't give any ETA on when we'll support BitBucket.

@darrenpowers

+1

@empperi
empperi commented Jun 7, 2013

Definetly +1

@pekpon
pekpon commented Jun 10, 2013

+1

@willhlaw

+1

@likelyeatenbyagrue

+1 as a (poor) sole dev i use bitbucket private repo... because it's free.

@rweng
rweng commented Jun 13, 2013

+1

@turboladen

+1

@cheesecake

+cheesecake

@davidcorne

+1

@JSchaenzle

+1AU

@parruc
parruc commented Jun 22, 2013

+1

@mokevnin

+1

@whatwho
whatwho commented Jun 24, 2013

+1

@ssbarnea

Due to the inability to github to provide an issue voting solution, people are spamming the issues with useless comments, also spamming watcher's inboxes, ending up in people configuring "Igore this thread"... probably the same happens even with the travis-ci developers. Bye!

@te-chris
te-chris commented Jul 2, 2013

I hardly think all these people taking their time to show their support for this feature is useless. That's a +1 from me.

@slafs
slafs commented Jul 3, 2013

Is there any statistic about how many github users are watching this issue (at least available for the project owners)?

@shadypierre

+1 just in case someone cares about it...

@BenDol
BenDol commented Jul 5, 2013

+1

@bubenkoff

+1

@adrie-dh
adrie-dh commented Jul 6, 2013

+1

@ajtrichards

+1

@juliensnz

+1

@rkh
Travis CI member
rkh commented Jul 8, 2013

unsubscribe

@Gemorroj
Gemorroj commented Jul 8, 2013

+1

@mvdkleijn

Bitbucket allows you to authenticate using your Github username nowadays. Would it be a nice / good idea to just add support for Bitbucket repos while still using Github user account info?

(It shouldn't be exceedingly hard to check someone's Bitbucket account to see what repos they have right?)

@peterdeweese

+1, and I don't care about user/account/permission features if I can use github's. The clone url should be sufficient.

@glarrain

Perhaps adding a bounty via Bountysource? Those +1s would be translated to dollars :)

@henrikhodne
Travis CI member

There are more issues with this than just authentication. Off the top of my head:

  • Authentication. Even though you can log in using your GitHub username with Bitbucket, we still need to authenticate with Bitbucket in order to talk to their API.
  • Sync. We need to integrate with the Bitbucket API and pull down the repositories you have access to and make sure that you still have access to it.
  • Build scripts. We need to update it to use a different clone strategy and pull repositories from Bitbucket instead. This means that we need to store somewhere that the repository is a Bitbucket repo.

There's more too, I'm sure. If we were to implement this I'd also like to see it be generic enough to implement other hosting sites as well.

Like said above, this is indeed on our radar, but right now we have a lot of other things we'd like to do, and this just isn't a priority for us at the moment.

@lenybernard

+1 GOGOGO :) You're awesome 👍

@jaspervalero

+1

Although I prefer GitHub, there are projects that I'm involved with that are hosted on Bitbucket that would be nice to have support for.

@duncandee

+1

@littlepea

+1

@masarliev

+1

@mloskot
mloskot commented Aug 21, 2013

+1

@samface
samface commented Aug 26, 2013

+1 dammit!!! :)

@fnkr
fnkr commented Aug 27, 2013

+1

@jimmyrosen

+1. Our company is stuck with Jenkins until this feature exists!

@lenybernard

We used Jenkins before and we moved to bamboo 1 month ago, for now it's really cool, we don't regret. We'll see later for our friend travis if they decide to support bitbucket.

@thingles

👍

@fourq
fourq commented Aug 30, 2013

+1

@paulRbr
paulRbr commented Aug 30, 2013

+1 for that one, this would be such a nice thing!

@xpol
xpol commented Sep 2, 2013

+1

@databake
databake commented Sep 2, 2013

+1

@simontuck

+1

@rikless
rikless commented Sep 9, 2013

+1

@sixty-nine

+1

@evillemez

+1

@DavidMikeSimon

+1.000000013

(Darn, shouldn't have used a float...)

@ncoghlan

Even an option that only worked with public BitBucket repos, and only with commits rather than pull requests would be worthwhile. At that point, it wouldn't need to be BitBucket specific at all. Instead:

  • allow direct specification of a git/hg repo to clone (+ a branch name)
  • allow us to set up a commit hook on the repo that triggers the Travis CI build
@glarrain

I concur with @ncoghlan

@MaksJS
MaksJS commented Sep 18, 2013

+1

@Chris2011

Need this feature too, seen Travis today and I have private repos on BitBucket. +1

@railscard

+1

@vyorkin
vyorkin commented Sep 20, 2013

+1

@vad4msiu

+1

@fr33z3
fr33z3 commented Sep 20, 2013

+1

@matee911

+1

@jbmeerkat

need this too

@itoche
itoche commented Sep 25, 2013

+1

@arnlaugsson

Jumping on the bandwagon: +1

Github is my number one, but some projects I am working on are hosted elsewhere, and Bitbucket is often selected.

@mindreframer

+1

@docteurklein

+2

@ilyakatz
ilyakatz commented Oct 8, 2013

+1

@erichiggins

hg +1

@Malet
Malet commented Oct 15, 2013

+1

@welwood08

I'm not comfortable with just advertising competing products here, but people really need to learn how to use a search engine. There are plenty of hosted CI options available, at least 2 of which provide BitBucket support and a "free for open source" plan - the name of 1 begins with "d", and another begins with "M".

Hopefully the Travis developers are already aware of these options and prioritise this issue accordingly, but can all the useless +1 comments please stop? Spend a little time with your search engine of choice and find a solution to your problem today, then maybe come back to Travis when this issue is resolved. If all the +1 noise stops, the notification system on this issue might actually become useful and bring such news to the attention of every interested party. :)

@glarrain

@welwood08 perhaps you need to be comfortable with using your brain and realize the problem is not that we don't want to use a search engines (chances are that we did, don't you think?). Who told you those competing services (not products) are what we need? Are you sure they offer the exact same functionality?

If you dislike the +1, there is a Unwatch button right at the bottom. Of course, if you have any other way of enabling users to state that they need/want this particular feature, feel free to let us know.

@jasperdcbe

+1

@veewee
veewee commented Oct 18, 2013

+1

@benlau
benlau commented Oct 28, 2013

+1

@saltvedt

+1

@hotrush
hotrush commented Dec 26, 2013

+1

@godfryd
godfryd commented Dec 28, 2013

+1

@mlhamel
mlhamel commented Jan 3, 2014

+1

@bhameyie
bhameyie commented Jan 5, 2014

+1

@neithere
neithere commented Jan 6, 2014

+1

@asiniy
asiniy commented Jan 9, 2014

+1

@william20111

+1

@tranfuga25s

+1

@milliams

+1

@qraynaud

+1

@ringods
ringods commented Jan 18, 2014

+1

@ankakusu

+1

@schrepfler

+1

@travis-bear

+1

@outofcoffee

+1

@mmoayyed

+1

@dunyakirkali

+1

@spoler
spoler commented Feb 3, 2014

+1

@abgit
abgit commented Feb 7, 2014

+1

@nixa
nixa commented Feb 7, 2014

+1

@dmjio
dmjio commented Feb 11, 2014

+1

@micnic
micnic commented Feb 13, 2014

+1

@Nowaker
Nowaker commented Feb 14, 2014

+1

@jakubkulhan

+1

@gnutix
gnutix commented Feb 15, 2014

+1

@Aaron1011

Based on the sheer number of +1's, I can tell that this a very popular idea. I know people mean well, but since the entire Travis team gets a ping when someone comments, can we please stop with the. +1's? There are so many, it's getting impossible to find other comments 😄

@asiniy
asiniy commented Feb 15, 2014

@Aaron1011 it seems best idea for stopping these +1 comments is to realize the bitbucket integraion & close this issue 😄

@Aaron1011

@asiniy: Yeah 😄. However, as the Travis team send before, it's going to be a lot of work. The gh library is used all over the code, and it would need to be changed to some kind of selector, which would choose Gtihub or Bitbucket

@Alexxzz
Alexxzz commented Feb 19, 2014

+1

@anderson916

+1

@asiniy
asiniy commented Feb 20, 2014

@Aaron1011 people don't want to hear you. They don't want bitbucket support too, they want just to +1 this issue 😄

+1!

P.S. This issue seems annoying to me too.

@asiniy
asiniy commented Feb 21, 2014

Unsubscribed from these annoying notifications 😃

@pwanning

+1

@dunyakirkali

I recently discovered Magnum-CI which works with Bitbucket. So I decided to start using that until Travis picks up BitBucket support.

@slafs
slafs commented Feb 22, 2014

Yup. drone.io also looks nice.

@pbx
pbx commented Feb 27, 2014

Also trying drone.io for now -- count me among the disappointed. I checked out Travis-CI on an enthusiastic recommendation from a developer who didn't understand it was limited to Github.

@mmoayyed

In my experience, Drone only allowed for a trial run of 50 builds. We switched over to wercker, which has worked well thus far. I'll give Magnum CI a try as well. Thanks for the tip.

@teozkr
teozkr commented Feb 27, 2014

@mmoayyed, from what I can tell that limit only applies to private repositories.

@kevinzhow

+1

@sloot14
sloot14 commented Mar 4, 2014

+1

@renekorss

+1

@leeight
leeight commented Mar 13, 2014

+1

@Kludgy
Kludgy commented Mar 14, 2014

+1 This is a great tool, but presently inaccessible to me.

@rene-s
rene-s commented Mar 24, 2014

+1

@arielpts

+1

@darth10
darth10 commented Mar 24, 2014

+1

@dellis23

-1

Err, I mean, +1

@b3ni
b3ni commented Mar 27, 2014

+1

@mnegi
mnegi commented Mar 27, 2014

+1

@aitboudad

+1

@gondo
gondo commented Apr 1, 2014

+1

@vobject
vobject commented Apr 1, 2014

+1

@andreasrosdal

+1

@pekpon
pekpon commented Apr 4, 2014

+1 again

@dwt
dwt commented Apr 7, 2014

+1 and I concur with @ncoghlan: Allow arbitrary public repositories and allow triggering a build via a web hook.

Then later consider expanding it.

I know that I can use a different service, but I'd rather use travis.ci, even if I can't the github integration.

@pminnieur

👍

@kevmeyer
kevmeyer commented Apr 8, 2014

+1

@poulp
poulp commented Apr 9, 2014

+1

@andr83
andr83 commented Apr 12, 2014

+1

@ismaelisuani

+1

@bonomat
bonomat commented Apr 15, 2014

+1

@KingYes
KingYes commented Apr 15, 2014

+1

@pstch
pstch commented Apr 16, 2014

+1

@Ephemera

Plz.

@rvdvyver

+3*

+2 already taken by @docteurklein

@qw3r
qw3r commented Apr 18, 2014

+1

@PavelKonon

+1

@hfossli
hfossli commented Apr 22, 2014

+10 (devs in our company)

@robeden
robeden commented Apr 22, 2014

+1

@lukebrowell

Please adapt.

Github is great, but Travis-CI is currently unsuitable for customers who find themselves required to avoid vendor lock-in, such as some of the serious corporates I work with.

(+27)

@langtind

This is something we need.

+1

@aerben
aerben commented Apr 28, 2014

+1

@kode4food

+1

@okev
okev commented May 5, 2014

While assessing other hosted CI solutions I've come to learn that there's a lot going on that the GitHub API provides. Great. There's one small but critical design-level problem in play here - if its the GitHub API, then ITS NOT GIT.

I'd be surprised if there isn't some workflow or other design level change that can't be applied to open the door to other repos. The whole idea of GIT was to be decentralized and distributed. This is clearly not respected here. Coding, even devops, is about finding solutions to problems. Heck, even the Heroku workflow is a new git destination and plenty of developers are comfortable with that. Here are some workarounds to the github API:

  • cli utilities
  • polling the repo over ssh
  • just getting devs to push to a new remote

GitHub is great, but it's not "everything git". Please provide some level of support for other toolchains.

@Aaron1011

@okev: There's some discussion about this near the (way) top of the issue, which you might have missed.

To summarize, the code for Travis CI is heavily structured around Github, from everything from authentication to receiving push events. Massive refactoring will be required to add BitBucket support. You can search through travis-core for gh -it's the Github API library Travis CI uses. Given the amount of time and effort involved, the Travis team feels that they can't commit to such a huge change now, or at some definite future data. You're welcome to work towards it yourself, however. Adding in abstractions around using gh is a good first step, I think.

@Aaron1011

Also, it would be nice if no more people added '+1' comments. There are already a ton of them, and everyone on the Travis team gets a notification when one is added. See my above comment and the top of the issue for more information.

@Delors
Delors commented May 7, 2014

+1

@beshkenadze

+1

@ajwhite
ajwhite commented May 9, 2014

+1

@paulopatto

+💯K
👍

@VeryCB
VeryCB commented May 14, 2014

+1

@ahochsteger

+1

@mituldthakkar

+1 :)

@wyuenho
wyuenho commented May 16, 2014

+1

@treshugart

+1

@tscheepers

+1

@digitaljerry

+1

@anacrolix

👍

@theScud
theScud commented May 24, 2014

+1

@leite
leite commented May 25, 2014

+1, it's just an api - c'mon!

@mbroadst

+1

@jacksonfm

+1

@limonte
limonte commented Jun 2, 2014

+1

@mxnr
mxnr commented Jun 3, 2014

+1

@BanzaiMan BanzaiMan locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 9, 2014
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Something went wrong with that request. Please try again.