Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GitHub Actions now supports CI/CD, free for public repositories

github.blog

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 239 posts

Re: GitHub Actions now supports CI/CD, free for public repositories

#91

Post by clinta »

snitko wrote: post #83
sytse wrote: post #2

This is great news for developers. The trend has been to combine version control and CI for years now. For a timeline see https://about.gitlab.com/2019/08/08/built-in-ci-cd-version-c... This is bad news for the CI providers that depend on GitHub, in particular CircleCI. Luckily for them (or maybe they saw this coming) they recently raised a series D https://circleci.com/blog/we-raised-a-56m-series-d-what-s-ne... and…

It's a horrible trend. CI should not be tied to version control. I mean we all have to deal with it now, but I'd much rather have my CI agnostic and not have config files for it checked into the repo. I've browsed through the article you linked to, one of the subtitles was "Realizing the future of DevOps is a single application". Also a horrible idea: I think it locks developers into a certain workflow which is hard…

I'm an operations guy, but I think I have a different perspective. The developers I work with don't have to think about CI/CD, but the configuration still lives in the repo, I'm just a contributer to that repo like they are.

Having CI configuration separate from the code sounds like a nightmare when a code change requires CI configurations to be updated. A new version of code requires a new dependency for instance, there needs to be a way to tie the CI configuration change with a commit that introduced that dependency. That comes automatically when they're in the same repo.

Re: GitHub Actions now supports CI/CD, free for public repositories

#93

Post by ItalyPaleAle »

t3rabytes wrote: post #67
theptip wrote: post #22

As a Gitlab user that's not strongly committed to the platform, this looks like a pretty interesting option. Anyone have thoughts on how this compares to e.g. Google Cloud Builder in terms of functionality? Being integrated into the GH backend seems like a big perk, rather than having to use webhooks for everything. Seems like you can do things like build your Docker containers ( https://developer.github.com/actions/…

> Google Cloud Builder It's actually Cloud Build under the covers. Their Actions Library sure beats have to figure out how to write the configs yourself for GCB though.

> It's actually Cloud Build under the covers

Nope, it's actually something based on Azure Pipelines' code (on a different infrastructure)

https://twitter.com/natfriedman/status/1159526215658561536

Re: GitHub Actions now supports CI/CD, free for public repositories

#95

Post by justicezyx »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #85

This is very interesting to me. It also makes me think about the natural rise of monopolies and monoculture in tech. GitHub has really been extending to "eating the world" as of late. Recently in terms of their package registry that must have folks like Artifactory and Nexus a bit shaken, and now this, which is bad news for folks like CircleCI (and I say this as a CircleCI user). As a developer, in the short term I l…

This is interesting to people viewing the events in isolation.

These happen routinely on a daily basis. And being in a strategically foundational position makes such moves straightforward.

In the developer tooling market, GitHub is foundational, obviously. So it naturally will expand, and can also easily do so.

And it was these moments I lament Google's inability to buy GitHub. All these stuff are just repeating Google has had for a decade, they would have been the perfect marriage but Google refuses to pay big money...

Re: GitHub Actions now supports CI/CD, free for public repositories

#97

Post by snitko »

clinta wrote: post #91
snitko wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a horrible trend. CI should not be tied to version control. I mean we all have to deal with it now, but I'd much rather have my CI agnostic and not have config files for it checked into the repo. I've browsed through the article you linked to, one of the subtitles was "Realizing the future of DevOps is a single application". Also a horrible idea: I think it locks developers into a certain workflow which is hard…

I'm an operations guy, but I think I have a different perspective. The developers I work with don't have to think about CI/CD, but the configuration still lives in the repo, I'm just a contributer to that repo like they are. Having CI configuration separate from the code sounds like a nightmare when a code change requires CI configurations to be updated. A new version of code requires a new dependency for instance, t…

I hear you. I thought about it and I think you need to reframe the problem. If a change in the application breaks your CI, it means you need to adjust the CI so it doesn't break when such changes are introduced. In my experience, these kinds of things happen very rarely.

Re: GitHub Actions now supports CI/CD, free for public repositories

#98

Post by justicezyx »

snitko wrote: post #83
sytse wrote: post #2

This is great news for developers. The trend has been to combine version control and CI for years now. For a timeline see https://about.gitlab.com/2019/08/08/built-in-ci-cd-version-c... This is bad news for the CI providers that depend on GitHub, in particular CircleCI. Luckily for them (or maybe they saw this coming) they recently raised a series D https://circleci.com/blog/we-raised-a-56m-series-d-what-s-ne... and…

It's a horrible trend. CI should not be tied to version control. I mean we all have to deal with it now, but I'd much rather have my CI agnostic and not have config files for it checked into the repo. I've browsed through the article you linked to, one of the subtitles was "Realizing the future of DevOps is a single application". Also a horrible idea: I think it locks developers into a certain workflow which is hard…

Why it's horrible?

Technically, version control lends itself naturally as part of the now well-accepted infrastructure-as-code mantra.

Operationally, version control is the one that developers interfacing most primarily, shifting the interactions to that interface would be benefitical to users.

Of course, DevOps as a skill set is becoming less and less relevant, given the increasingly integrated toolings that interfacing directly with developers, that's for sure.

Re: GitHub Actions now supports CI/CD, free for public repositories

#99

Post by cyode »

Lots of comments here about what this means for CircleCI. Found it interesting that CircleCI's CEO has a testimonial in the "What our community is saying" at https://github.com/features/actions:

“CircleCI has been building a CI/CD platform since 2011, and GitHub has been a great partner. GitHub Actions is further validation that CI/CD is critical for the success of every software team. We believe that developers thrive in open, connected ecosystems, and we look forward to working with GitHub to lead the evolution of CI/CD.” Jim Rose CEO of CircleCI

Re: GitHub Actions now supports CI/CD, free for public repositories

#100

Post by colemorrison »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #85

This is very interesting to me. It also makes me think about the natural rise of monopolies and monoculture in tech. GitHub has really been extending to "eating the world" as of late. Recently in terms of their package registry that must have folks like Artifactory and Nexus a bit shaken, and now this, which is bad news for folks like CircleCI (and I say this as a CircleCI user). As a developer, in the short term I l…

Honestly, I think it's a good thing in general. Like you've said, being able to just do things here and cut out all of that wasted time spent connecting disparate services... I mean assuming they pull this off well, it will absolutely make things better for me personally.

That all being said, I'm not sure how the long run comes into play here? It's bad if we extrapolate a long run prediction where no one else innovates or creates something in this space. But in reality, someone's going to be annoyed by it, someone's going to start up a different solution, and whether it works or not...it'll be there. Whether it's a small startup or a big enterprise challenging - if there's market gains to be had from adding this, it'll get added.

Don't get me wrong, you're on point with a lot of things in tech. Monoculture and monopolies are becoming super "in-your-face" considering just how much control the FAANG companies have in influencing tech and the like. However, I do find it odd that a single feature release by a larger company results, more often in not, in much of HN community losing their minds over prospective world domination. (not you op, but just in general...granted similar outrage happens to small open source stuff just as much so maybe this point is moot).

As John Maynard Keynes put it, "In the long run we are all dead." But in the short run, this just seems like a super useful feature added to a super useful product that will just make things easier for all developers.

Post reply on HN