3 ms·

Pretty angry that Github have made this change with no mechanism for adding machine users without paying a per month charge. It seems like a key feature, which

• myhf 10y ago
  Deploy keys
  • lox 10y ago
    https://developer.github.com/guides/managing-deploy-keys/ https://developer.github.com/guides/managing-deploy-keys/
• giovannibajo1 10y ago
  Both Travis and Circle automatically install a deploy key into the project. It doesn't require additional machine users.
  • lox 10y ago
    That's fine if you have a single repo, but CI normally needs to access lots of different repos. GitHub's documentation describes why you need machine users for anything but the most trivial deployment. https://developer.github.com/guides/managing-deploy-keys/ https://developer.github.com/guides/managing-deploy-keys/ It's also what GitHub does internally.
    • robalfonso 10y ago
      Yep, same here. Our build system uses multiple repos (and now you can have as many as you want!) This is shortsighted on their part, I hope they pay attention.
    • teraflop 10y ago
      If I understand that page correctly, the only real difference is that Github arbitrarily prevents you from using the same deploy key for multiple repositories. If they lifted that restriction, this problem would go away.
  • cheshire137 10y ago
    Semaphore works the same way.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• ponytech 10y ago
  Why don't you just add the SSH public keys of your CI machine to your own GitHub account?
  • giovannibajo1 10y ago
    I wouldn't want a CI to store a key that has R/W access to all my repos in all my organizations. I'm in at least 5 active organizations that I would be putting at risk
    • cm3 10y ago
      Use shadow repos just for CI and nothing else.
• manmal 10y ago
  CI machines cause most of their traffic, why should they be free?