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

GitHub Agentic Workflows

github.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 149 posts

Re: GitHub Agentic Workflows

#101

Post by nozzlegear »

huevosabio wrote: post #36

Github should focus on getting their core offerings in shape first. I stopped using GH actions when I ran into this issue: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/151956#discuss... That was almost a year ago and to this date I still get updates of people falling into the same issue.

I've been a paying Github user for years now, and as an open source maintainer who uses Github Actions, I'm annoyed that my money has been funding AI bullshit instead of fixes and improvements for their core offering.

Re: GitHub Agentic Workflows

#102

Post by resquawk »

onionisafruit wrote: post #41

This is an extension for the gh cli that takes markdown files as input and creates github actions workflow files from them. Not just any workflow files, but 1000-line beasts that you'll need an LLM to explain what they do. I tried out `gh aw init` and hit Y at the wrong prompt. It created a COPILOT_GITHUB_TOKEN on the github repo I happened to be in presumably with a token from my account. That's something that reall…

Thanks, this has been changed (no use of local token) and there are now extra confirmations too.

Re: GitHub Agentic Workflows

#103

Post by resquawk »

clarkdale wrote: post #10

I feel like this solution hallucinated the concept of Workflow Lock File (.lock.yml), which is not available in Github Actions. This is a missing feature that would solve the security risk of changing git tag references when calling to actions like utility@v1

[dead]

Re: GitHub Agentic Workflows

#104

Post by resquawk »

r2vcap wrote: post #76

I tested it a bit yesterday, and it looks good—at least from a structural perspective. Separating the LLM invocation from the apply step is a great idea. This isn’t meant to replace our previous deterministic GitHub Actions workflow; rather, it enables automation with broader possibilities while keeping LLM usage safer. Also, a reminder: if you run Codex/Claude Code/whatever directly inside a GitHub Action without st…

> Separating the LLM invocation from the apply step is a great idea

Thanks, yes, this is crucial.

Re: GitHub Agentic Workflows

#107

Post by maccard »

CuriouslyC wrote: post #31

Stuffing agents somewhere they don't belong rather than making the system work better with the agents people already use. Obvious marketing driven cash grab.

> Stuffing agents somewhere they don't belong rather than making the system work better with the agents people already use.

I'm not bullish on LLM based agentic coding, but if there was ever a place to put an agent it would be in a centralised provider that has access to your CI, issues and source code. It seems like a perfect fit.

Re: GitHub Agentic Workflows

#108

Post by resquawk »

ljm wrote: post #74
woodruffw wrote: post #24

I find this confusing: I can see the value in having an LLM assist you in developing a CI/CD workflow, but why would you want one involved in any continuous degree with your CI/CD? Perhaps it’s not as bad as that given that there’s a “compilation” phase, but the value add there isn’t super clear either (why would I check in both the markdown and the generated workflow; should I always regenerate from the markdown whe…

I don't personally want any kind of workflow that spams my repo with gen AI refactorings or doc maintenance either. That is literally just creating overhead for me and it sounds like an excuse to shoehorn AI in to a workflow more than anything else.

You are 100% in control.

Re: GitHub Agentic Workflows

#109

Post by resquawk »

mook wrote: post #95
idan wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://github.github.io/gh-aw/#gallery down the page has a list of concrete applications For examplpe, https://github.github.io/gh-aw/blog/2026-01-13-meet-the-work... has several examples of agentic workflows for managing issues and PRs, and those examples link to actual agentic workflow files you can read and use as a starting point for your own workflows. The value is "delegate chores that cannot be handled by a h…

Unfortunately only the first one (arborist) actually links to something that the workflow outputs (a created issue), so it's hard to see actual examples of what those things do. Some of the earlier comments said they output giant workflow files, but there weren't really any examples either. Basically it feels like a long article that says "we have this new thing that does cool things", but never gives enough concrete…

These contain links to sample outputs:

* Quality/Hygiene: https://github.github.com/gh-aw/blog/2026-01-13-meet-the-wor...

* Documentation: https://github.github.com/gh-aw/blog/2026-01-13-meet-the-wor...

* Code improvement: https://github.github.com/gh-aw/blog/2026-01-13-meet-the-wor...

* Refactoring: https://github.github.com/gh-aw/blog/2026-01-13-meet-the-wor...

Re: GitHub Agentic Workflows

#110

Post by vikkymelani »

SkyPuncher wrote: post #47
huevosabio wrote: post #36

Github should focus on getting their core offerings in shape first. I stopped using GH actions when I ran into this issue: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/151956#discuss... That was almost a year ago and to this date I still get updates of people falling into the same issue.

Ah, the critical problem dilemma. Some percentage of free users become paid users, but the free users take up an unreasonable amount of your time/energy/support. The solution seems simple. Buy their product.

[dead]
Post reply on HN