3 ms·
This is basically how most other CI systems work. GitLab CI, Jenkins, Buildbot, Cirrus CI, etc. are all other systems I've used and they work this way. I find
by Conan_Kudo 9mo ago
This is basically how most other CI systems work. GitLab CI, Jenkins, Buildbot, Cirrus CI, etc. are all other systems I've used and they work this way.
I find GitHub Actions abhorrent in a way that I never found a CI/CD system before...
- embedding-shape 9mo ago> I find GitHub Actions abhorrent in a way that I never found a CI/CD system before... That's just the good old Microsoft effect, they have a reverse-midas-touch when it comes to actually delivering good UX experiences.
- blibble 9mo agoas usual for Microslop products: it's designed for maximum lock-in everything is including some crappy proprietary yaml rather than using standard tooling so instead of being a collection of easily composable and testable bits it's a mess that only works on their platform
- rerdavies 9mo agoIt seems more of a cultural issue that -- I'm pretty sure -- predates Microsoft's acquisition of GitHub. I assume crappy proprietary yaml can be blamed on use of Ruby. And there seems to be an odd and pervasive "80% is good enough" feel to pretty much everything in GitHub, which is definitely cultural, and I'm pretty sure, also predates Microsoft's acquisition.
- treyd 9mo agoGHA is based on Azure Actions. This is evident in how bad its security stance is, since Azure Actions was designed to be used in a more closed/controlled environment.