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

201–210 of 239 posts

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

#201

Post by weberc2 »

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…

CircleCI invented many of their own problems. No API to trigger workflow runs and the only trigger “API” is pushing to a git branch. A horrible job-centric UI when all you really care about are workflows. Workflows that don’t let you express conditionality and assume all errors are fatal. A broken data model that confuses the same workflow on different branches with different workflows (no good way to figure out how long your PR workflow takes on average because each PR is it’s own workflow, for some reason). No good state management or data passing options. Hopefully they will sort those things out, but it feels like they went out of their way to build a thing with a crazy data model and triggers that are tightly coupled to github.

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

#203

Post by DannyBee »

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 was cloud build, it's now azure pipelines.

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

#204

Post by DannyBee »

t3rabytes wrote: post #197
ItalyPaleAle wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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

Ah, that must be a change with the more recent revisions then. The original version was definitely using Cloud Build.

They swapped it post-acquisition. (Google and Github started working together more, MS acquired them, that stopped :P)

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

#205

Post by lstamour »

asdfman123 wrote: post #154
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…

As a .NET developer, this just smells like trying to rope in more people to Azure DevOps and then the Azure cloud. This is Microsoft's endgame. Everything they do is to win marketshare in the cloud. I don't think it's an evil plan by any means, though, and their competition has been nothing but good for the ecosystem. Remember, they were evil about Windows because so many people didn't have any other real choice. The…

I also see this as a play for cloud marketshare, but if Github can nail the “simple yet good enough” UI standard for this CI service, it’ll win out hands-down over Azure, which would evolve to become the more niche product that does more for SME, enterprise and larger teams, perhaps. Win/win, especially if they’ve a migration strategy between the services. I just hope the free Azure DevOps plan (for open source) doesn’t go away now that this exists. The more cloud companies can do to lower the barrier of entry, the better. :)

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

#206

Post by weberc2 »

wolco wrote: post #150
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Basically everyone I talk to despises Facebook, which gets pretty much no help from the state, but they still use it because there are no real alternatives. My argument is that technological platforms are pretty special when it comes to monopoly power because their lock in/switching costs are so high that they can last long after they've stagnated in terms of innovation. And they just buy up all their competition.

There are tons of alternatives just none that your friends are on. Surprised no one has taken facebook's launch strategy. Only allow it in one school. Then only ivy league colleges. Then all colleges. Then everyone. Also allow you to import in your email contacts on signup. That strategy created press / word of mouth and kept it youthful until they were ready for the big launch.

Facebook is different. Your friends are the product, not the tech. With Github the tech is the product.

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

#207

Post by signal11 »

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…

Re this specific feature — note that Bitbucket has had this for a while now, as did Gitlab. Github is playing catch-up here.

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

#208

Post by weberc2 »

bad_user wrote: post #167
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…

CircleCI is fine for the private repositories of work projects, but not for public libraries. In trying to migrate a fairly popular open source library I maintain to CircleCI, from TravisCI, I bumped in the following two problems: 1. setting up a build matrix with various configurations (JVM version, compiler version, coverage on or off, etc) is a pain in the ass (possible, but a pain nonetheless), a configuration th…

We’ve had to build a lot on. Like support for passing state across jobs in a workflow, or branching, or triggering a workflow with parameters, or triggering a workflow from a different branch, or etc. CCI went to unnecessary lengths to not support obvious use cases, or that’s how it feels. :(

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

#210

Post by dharmab »

Smotko wrote: post #164
snitko wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll give you a counter example: whenever I change CI workflow for something that has nothing to do with the repo - like a new deployment scheme to staging - I have to go and ask people to merge/rebase from master into their branches or they won't be able to deploy. It happens pretty often and I'd rather avoid this.

To fix this problem you can set up you CI server to merge into the base branch automatically before running the code (in fact you should probably do this by default for other reasons). This way your devs won't have to merge, they can just rerun their tests, which should be the same workflow as if your CI config is separate from your codebase.

If you tests are lightweight and fast you could even trigger this automatically
Post reply on HN