3 ms·

I highly agree with inappropriateness of YAML for GitLab CI/CD configuration. It does work for simple use cases and/or in small repositories - however, doing so

I highly agree with inappropriateness of YAML for GitLab CI/CD configuration. It does work for simple use cases and/or in small repositories - however, doing something slightly more complicated than a simple build/test/deploy pipeline takes an immense effort, with a range of hacks and workarounds. Even the simplest things, like passing some data (e.g. a link) from one job to another requires quite an overhead (either using artifacts, storing it somewhere in KV or even something worse). Moreover, .gitlab-ci.yml is one and only entry-point for the CI configuration, so everything goes into it. Yes, it does have concept of includes, but even that is quite limited and not sufficient for any reasonable workflow.

boleary-gl 8y ago
GitLab PM for Verify (CI) here. I agree that a lot of complex pipelines can be tough to express in YAML. One of our key focuses this year is to make advanced use cases for GitLab CI/CD more lovable. Specifically, you can see the overall direction here: https://about.gitlab.com/direction/verify/ https://about.gitlab.com/direction/verify/. Some specific issues I'd love feedback from the community on that I'm thinking about are: * Directed acyclic graphs (DAG) for pipelines: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/47063 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/47063 * Make it possible to use any language to generate `.gitlab-ci.yml` and pipelines: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/45828 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/45828 * First class support for multiple pipelines: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/28592 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/28592 * Self-modifying pipelines: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/44199 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/44199 (edited for readability)
- bmurphy1976 8y ago
  DAG's are good. Let me define a DAG in imperative code (any language I want) using any techniques I want, then I hand the DAG off to you and you execute it. Anything else is introducing complexity for complexities sake.

boleary-gl 8y ago

GitLab PM for Verify (CI) here. I agree that a lot of complex pipelines can be tough to express in YAML. One of our key focuses this year is to make advanced use cases for GitLab CI/CD more lovable. Specifically, you can see the overall direction here: https://about.gitlab.com/direction/verify/ https://about.gitlab.com/direction/verify/. Some specific issues I'd love feedback from the community on that I'm thinking about are: * Directed acyclic graphs (DAG) for pipelines: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/47063 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/47063 * Make it possible to use any language to generate `.gitlab-ci.yml` and pipelines: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/45828 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/45828 * First class support for multiple pipelines: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/28592 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/28592 * Self-modifying pipelines: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/44199 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab-ce/issues/44199 (edited for readability)

bmurphy1976 8y ago
DAG's are good. Let me define a DAG in imperative code (any language I want) using any techniques I want, then I hand the DAG off to you and you execute it. Anything else is introducing complexity for complexities sake.