3 ms·
> doesn't let you run paramaterized builds in their web UI? It doesn't? https://github.blog/changelog/2021-11-10-github-actions-input-types-for-manual-workflow
by yebyen 5y ago
> doesn't let you run paramaterized builds in their web UI?
It doesn't? https://github.blog/changelog/2021-11-10-github-actions-input-types-for-manual-workflows/ https://github.blog/changelog/2021-11-10-github-actions-inpu...
Maybe it didn't 6 months ago, but it seems this is an option now, and well-documented.
This is a topic of interest for me, I presented on Jenkins and GitOps to an audience at KubeCon who I suspect are almost all interested in moving away from Jenkins, or have been told to be interested in switching from Jenkins to something else, and I tried to get the idea across that they probably don't really need to switch the workflow tool even if it's ancient, ...
But maybe should consider subbing out some of the important fiddly bits underneath it (like, I assume the vast majority of Jenkins users are building images with Docker, and if they're running on Kubernetes, they're many of them wondering what they will do, or how long they really have before they have to start worrying about the deprecation of dockershim and how their lives are going to change when their clusters won't be running Docker under the hood anymore?)
I was actually arguing for a tool like Porter.sh to come in and make the boundaries of "what's in a build" super neat and tidy, organized, but also limited so the next time they feel compelled to switch workflow tooling, it will be a non-issue and can be over and finished inside of a single day's work. The problem isn't that your workflow tool is too old, it's that you've jammed too much arbitrary complexity inside of it, probably because the right abstraction was not made available to you at the time. "Switching off of Jenkins" just means building a second system and it comes with all the baggage of "second system syndrome" to do so.
Sure it's difficult switching from Jenkins, when you've built this gigantic pipeline with 18 branches and 12 of them run in parallel, half of them are configured with different options passed to the docker build tool, half of them must use buildx, and the third half of them are unmaintained so we don't go in there... so put some guard rails up around the hard parts! And get somebody in there to take care of those cobwebs.
- 0xbadcafebee 5y agoI'm glad it's an option now! That was crazy that it took 3 years for this feature to show up, though. I think we need a few more "12 Factor App"-style guidelines for modern systems. 12 Factor goes a long way to abstract away the tendency for implementation lock-in. But we can probably create a few more guidelines specific to CI so it's portable. Use OAuth, use the same authorization layer as your VCS, tie secrets and artifacts to the VCS repo, make every plugin a Docker container. (I'm stealing these concepts from Drone because it has the best cloud-native design I've ever seen) The final unsolved bit is how to manage a DAG of jobs and hooks around every event in a portable way. We probably need a universal CI spec and API, but maybe that's too specific. Also: holy crap, I don't think I've seen Porter.sh before, I love the idea! Definitely going to look into that
- steveklabnik 5y agoThat page 404s for me.
- yebyen 5y agoHmm, I wonder how the link got changed... it worked when I posted it? Pretty sure? Someone else found the link.
- steveklabnik 5y ago... now it no longer does. How odd.
- bewuethr 5y agoLink should be https://github.blog/changelog/github-actions-input-types-for-manual-workflows/ https://github.blog/changelog/github-actions-input-types-for...