I suggest you ...

Store build configuration in the repo (like .travis.yml)

Travis CI's .travis.yml files are a godsend when maintaining large numbers of repositories, and GitLab CI would really benefit from a similar system (maybe .gitlab.yml). We have an in-house framework with many small components that are all tested/built in exactly the same fashion. If we make changes to our build scripts, a web interface becomes a tedious bottleneck in the process. This would also solve the current most popular idea ("Maybe it should be possible to have a build script per branch if needed") because each branch can simply have a different .gitlab.yml as required.

189 votes
Vote
Sign in
Check!
(thinking…)
Reset
or sign in with
  • facebook
  • google
    Password icon
    I agree to the terms of service
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    Erin MillardErin Millard shared this idea  ·   ·  Admin →
    蒼時弦也蒼時弦也 shared a merged idea: Support specify ruby, node, php version  ·   · 

    9 comments

    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      Submitting...
      • Ciro SantilliCiro Santilli commented  · 

        @Kamil I don't quite understand: you have `.travis.yml` support for GitLab CI? Do you mean implementing a subset of of Travis supports? If you could share the could somewhere that would be great.

      • Kamil TrzcińskiKamil Trzciński commented  · 

        I have working PoC with .travis.yml support and support for build matrix. If anyone is interested please drop me e-mail.

      • Alexander GeorgievskiyAlexander Georgievskiy commented  · 

        GitLab needs .travis.yml support like Shippable and Jenkins (with plugin). There can be some different .ci.yml format, but .travis.yml support absolutely needed.

      • Ciro SantilliCiro Santilli commented  · 

        @xixi please don't submit +1 comments. If you want to subscribe write just "subscribe". I wrote +1 before that before and was later told it was not good =)

      • Matthew HailwoodMatthew Hailwood commented  · 

        +1 Agreed, this would also simplify adding extra actions and configuration to the builds since the web interface will not need to be updated for every feature.

      Feedback and Knowledge Base