3 ms·
There are many tools and techniques like this. Not a nock against this tool, just an observation that we seemingly need these tools. Is there no better way, G
by baby_souffle 9mo ago
There are many tools and techniques like this. Not a nock against this tool, just an observation that we seemingly need these tools.
Is there no better way, GitHub?
- embedding-shape 9mo ago> Is there no better way, GitHub? CircleCI solved this anno 2011, with "Rebuild with SSH". Microsoft asleep at the wheel as usual, not sure it's unexpected at this point.
- bathtub365 9mo agoThe more you have to rerun your actions to debug them, the more money Microsoft makes. They aren’t incentivized to save you time.
- embedding-shape 9mo agoCompletely bonkers that people, companies and organizations just swallow this, bait and all.
- esafak 9mo agoFree hosting, CI minutes, and an ecosystem.
- embedding-shape 9mo agoCommit and push to test small incremental changes, self-hosted runners' time still count towards CI minutes, and an ecosystem hellbent on presenting security holes as new features. I'm a bit unimpressed :)
- esafak 9mo agoDagger. Workflows that run anywhere, including locally.
- Storment33 9mo agoI've seen dagger pipelines they're horrendous. Just have GitHub Actions call out to a task runner like Make/Taskfile etc and use an environment manager Mise or Nix to install all the tools.
- esafak 9mo agoI think that is a good pattern too, though I would replace the make/taskfile step with something bazel-like. Dagger used to be more declarative with CUE, but demand was not strong enough.