Apache Maven vs. Travis CI

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Apache Maven
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
Apache Maven is an open source build automation tool.N/A
Travis CI
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
Travis CI is an open source continuous integration platform, that enables users to run and test simultaneously on different environments, and automatically catch code failures and bugs.
$69
per month
Pricing
Apache MavenTravis CI
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
1 Concurrent Job Plan
$69
per month
Bootstrap
$69
per month 1 concurrent job
2 Concurrent Jobs Plan
$129
per month
Startup
$129
per month 2 concurrent jobs
5 Concurrent Jobs Plan
$249
per month
Small Business
$249
per month 5 concurrent jobs
Premium
$489
per month 10 concurrent jobs
Platinum
$794+
per month starting at 15 concurrent jobs
Free Plan
Free
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Apache MavenTravis CI
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional DetailsDiscount available for annual pricing.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Apache MavenTravis CI
Considered Both Products
Apache Maven
Chose Apache Maven
Ant is useful if your build is heavily based on customs scripts running in the right order. Maven greatly simplifies the process to keep track of and download build dependencies compared with Apache Ant. If your build is based on multiple custom scripts running in a specific …
Chose Apache Maven
We evaluated many options to automate our build process including Apache Maven, Jenkins, Octopus Deploy and Azure DevOps Server. We found Apache Maven to be the easiest to use by far. We like the ability to customize our build process for individual departments. Apache Maven …
Chose Apache Maven
If there are competitor products out there, I've never heard of them. This is the solution for Java dependency management. From my experience, the alternative is "no solution, create your own."
Chose Apache Maven
Maven was chosen out of convention as a static build tool. Personally, I prefer Gradle's less verbose syntax and modularity. Same with Bazel and Sbt.
Chose Apache Maven
Integration with Java IDEs is fast and easy. It automatically fetches and resolves dependencies. It is a specification built tool.
Chose Apache Maven
Maven vs Gradle

  • Maven is much more mature vs Gradle and been around for a long time. Easy to get developers. Gradle is new but adoption is fast
Chose Apache Maven
Ant, Maven's opposing framework, is often a point of comparison. Although Ant does not require formal conventions, it is procedural in the sense that you must tell Ant exactly what to do and when. It also lacks a lifecycle, along with goal definition and dependencies. Maven, on …
Chose Apache Maven
It has a project object module and pre-defined structure that is better than Make and running Ant scripts for builds. There is fairly good support from the online open source community. Documentation from Apache is also very good.
Travis CI
Chose Travis CI
Jenkins is probably the leading choice for automation and has loads of features and a large community behind it, but it can be overkill for many projects. It also has more of a web 1.0 look and interface.
CircleCI is another similar big competitor, but cannot compete with Travis …
Chose Travis CI
There are a few other options out there, CircleCI, Codeship and Wrecker would be a few good ones I can also recommend, each one has its particularity but I believe Travis has the best interface and flexibility of all of them.
I'd recommend trying them all and seeing which one …
Chose Travis CI
Jenkins is much more complicated to configure and start using. Although, one you have done that, it's extremely powerful and full of features. Maybe many more than Travis CI. As per TeamCity, I would never go back to using it. It's also complicated to configure but it is not …
Chose Travis CI
There are a number of alternatives to Travis CI, but Travis remains the most popular, since it was one of the first to show up. It has a lot of examples, support for building dozens of languages, and good documentation. Significant portions of the system are open source, so you …
Best Alternatives
Apache MavenTravis CI
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Apache MavenTravis CI
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
6.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.0
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
5.1
(0 ratings)
4.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Apache MavenTravis CI
Likelihood to Recommend
Building and automating packaging of software can be a challenging task. As the complexity of the project grows so do the dependencies on third-party artifacts. Using Maven we can define and manage the project structure centrally and it helps improve overall build times.
Read full review
TravisCI is suited for workflows involving typical software development but unfortunately I think the software needs more improvement to be up to date with current development systems and TravisCI hasn't been improving much in that space in terms of integrations.
Read full review
Pros
  • Makes the build process simple and easy to do.
  • It provides a standard build system that can be adopted by multiple, different groups within an organization.
  • It's extensible with easy to use custom extensions which our developers take full advantage of.
Read full review
  • It's simple and easy to get started (it can detect the language being used based on build configuration files like a Maven pom.xml).
  • It's free (as in beer) for open source projects.
  • It has a responsive staff (you can file issues on GitHub to ask for new languages or packages to be supported, and the turnaround time isn't too bad for the free offering).
  • The user interface is beautiful and easy-to-use, including features like live-tailing in-progress builds.
  • It supports specifying private environment variables and encrypted credentials, so that you can safely automate deployments (for example, pushing built docker images to DockerHub).
Read full review
Cons
  • One of the issues with building software using Apache Maven is that its cache resolution is not optimal. It pulls down all the artifacts onto the developer's local machine and can sometimes result in conflicts.
  • The build process can vary in time and gets progressively longer as the project's complexity increases.
Read full review
  • Travis CI is a fairly mature platform now, and most, if not all of the common complaints have been improved. This includes documentation and logs with color support.
Read full review
Usability
The overall usability of Apache Maven is very good to us. We were able to incorporate it into our company's build process pretty quickly. We deployed it to multiple teams throughout the entire enterprise. We got good feedback from our developers stating that Apache Maven has simplified their build process. It also allowed to to standardize the build process for the entire enterprise, thus ensure that each development team is using the same, consistent process to build code.
Read full review
TravisCI hasn't had much changes made to its software and has thus fallen behind compared to many other CI/CD applications out there. I can only give it a 5 because it does what it is supposed to do but lacks product innovation.
Read full review
Support Rating
I can't speak to the support, as I've never had issues. Apache Maven "just works," and errors were user errors or local nexus errors. Apache Maven is a great build/dependency management tool. I give it a 9/10 because occasionally the error message don't immediately indicate a solution...but again, those errors were always user or configuration errors, and the Maven documentation is extensive, so I don't find fault in Maven, but in its users.
Read full review
After the private equity firm had bought this company the innovation and support has really gone downhill a lot. I am not a fan that they have gutted the software trying to make money from it and put innovation and product development second.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Ant is useful if your build is heavily based on customs scripts running in the right order. Maven greatly simplifies the process to keep track of and download build dependencies compared with Apache Ant. If your build is based on multiple custom scripts running in a specific order there is a lot of overhead in Maven compared to Apache Ant.
Read full review
Jenkins is probably the leading choice for automation and has loads of features and a large community behind it, but it can be overkill for many projects. It also has more of a web 1.0 look and interface. CircleCI is another similar big competitor, but cannot compete with Travis CI's free account [in my opinion].
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Maven has been the only tool for building Java apps for a long time. And it being open source has helped maximize ROI.
  • I can't think of any negative. With Gradle coming up as a newer and better technology for building, some teams are shifting towards it.
Read full review
  • It saves you in infrastructure and setup costs, since running a server and installing and maintaining Jenkins can be a hassle.
Read full review
ScreenShots