We switched to buddy.works[0] about a year ago and honestly it’s just been… smooth. The UI is just great, the wealth and breadth of options is ever increasing and all the basics like knowing what went wrong, restarting, debugging, duplicating etc just work as you’d expect. One of the few companies I can recommend.
We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
31–40 of 98 posts
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#32How does GitHub fix GitHub using GitHub when GitHub is down?
Obviously they internally self-host a version of GitHub Actions to build GitHub itself. They know how unreliable it is to use the live version to do it.
I don't know what github is doing here, but I've seen this antipattern quite a few times in production at some big name companies...
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#33not to sound snarky, but what are you doing to address the 34 incident outages in the past 90 days? i feel like theres been no real update on this slow rolling disaster. we're not even a week into april and already a 5 hour outage in codespaces.
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#34GitHub Actions has a lot of basic usability issues, none of which are fatal but all of which irritate me on a daily basis. Let's start with the first and simplest: Why did my build fail? You'd think this should be front and center. Yet, the UX is "click through a couple links, then wade through thousands of lines of log output". In practice this is "download the logs and grep them for text strings like FAILURE". The…
FWIW, while the UI for re-running jobs used to be better, the result was a LOT worse as it would re-run all the jobs instead of just the failing ones, so I am still MUCH happier with the new flow ;P.
I feel like those are not mutually exclusive. The button could say "Rerun failed jobs" no confirmation with a small ▼ next to it that has the other "rerun all jobs" drop down.
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the feedback! I'm one of the PMs for GitHub Actions, and I appreciate this. Thinking about Actions as a set of primitives that you can compose is very much how I think about the product (and I think the other PMs as well) so I'm glad that resonates. We're always welcome to feedback, and we're continuing to invest and improve on the product, so I'm hopeful that we can address the features that you're missin…
From my perspectives, GHA is missing 2 things over CircleCI. A way to pause an action for approval, or a way to pull artifacts from other workflows. Both of these actions are _possible_ with an external service but painful to setup. I want to: create a terraform plan, approve it, and then deploy the specifically approved plan. That's not so difficult in CircleCI but is _painful_ in GHA.
fwiw, you can use approvals using environments: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/deployment/targeting-diff...
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#36GitHub Actions has a lot of basic usability issues, none of which are fatal but all of which irritate me on a daily basis. Let's start with the first and simplest: Why did my build fail? You'd think this should be front and center. Yet, the UX is "click through a couple links, then wade through thousands of lines of log output". In practice this is "download the logs and grep them for text strings like FAILURE". The…
> because of some flakey third-party service
I've started building in auto retries to the CI scripts for this type of thing, at least once it annoys me to a certain extent. The most glaring and unavoidable ones that come to mind across several projects are external certificate time stamping services.
I generally hate this type of thing: retry mechanisms are a lazy band-aid that can mask real problems. But at the same time, it just isn't possible to get to 100% and retry is a better band-aid than constant human intervention.
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the feedback! I'm one of the PMs for GitHub Actions, and I appreciate this. Thinking about Actions as a set of primitives that you can compose is very much how I think about the product (and I think the other PMs as well) so I'm glad that resonates. We're always welcome to feedback, and we're continuing to invest and improve on the product, so I'm hopeful that we can address the features that you're missin…
That's very much how I think about it too, which is why it frustrates me that I can't create canned workflows that apply to all my repos of a certain type (language specific linting and releasing say). I know I can create user/organisation templates, but all that does is put it in the UI chooser to create a commit to put it in the repo from the web. I want to do something like `include: OJFord/workflows/terraform-pro…
Could you stuff your actions definition into a sub module pointed at trunk?
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#38It's weird to me that GitHub doesn't have larger machines types available for actions yet. I don't want to bother with a self-hosted runner just to get more CPUs. They have much larger machines available for Codespaces - why not actions? I'm happy to pay for them.
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#39Github Actions folks if you're listening, please address lack of "Allow Failure" modifier for job runs. There is a reason every other CI on the planet has this, and no, it's not the same as "Continue on Error" https://github.com/actions/toolkit/issues/399 (currently 800+ upvotes and counting)
Re: We use GitHub Actions to build GitHub
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thanks for the feedback! I'm one of the PMs for GitHub Actions, and I appreciate this. Thinking about Actions as a set of primitives that you can compose is very much how I think about the product (and I think the other PMs as well) so I'm glad that resonates. We're always welcome to feedback, and we're continuing to invest and improve on the product, so I'm hopeful that we can address the features that you're missin…
That's very much how I think about it too, which is why it frustrates me that I can't create canned workflows that apply to all my repos of a certain type (language specific linting and releasing say). I know I can create user/organisation templates, but all that does is put it in the UI chooser to create a commit to put it in the repo from the web. I want to do something like `include: OJFord/workflows/terraform-pro…
This might be what you're looking for: https://github.com/github/roadmap/issues/74