Live data from Hacker News

Run GitHub Actions locally

github.com

61–70 of 137 posts

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#61
post #42

Every mention of Github Actions is an occasion to start looking for the best alternative in , let's go! Is Dagger usable yet? Is there still hope for Earthly? Are general purpose workflow systems winning any time soon, or are we still afraid of writing code? Any new systems out there that cover all the totally basic features like running locally, unlike Github Actions?

How's Jenkins looking these days?

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#62
post #61
post #42

Every mention of Github Actions is an occasion to start looking for the best alternative in , let's go! Is Dagger usable yet? Is there still hope for Earthly? Are general purpose workflow systems winning any time soon, or are we still afraid of writing code? Any new systems out there that cover all the totally basic features like running locally, unlike Github Actions?

How's Jenkins looking these days?

With Git Actions at full speed..... it is dying.

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#63
post #61
post #42

Every mention of Github Actions is an occasion to start looking for the best alternative in , let's go! Is Dagger usable yet? Is there still hope for Earthly? Are general purpose workflow systems winning any time soon, or are we still afraid of writing code? Any new systems out there that cover all the totally basic features like running locally, unlike Github Actions?

How's Jenkins looking these days?

nyuk, nyuk, nyuk

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#64
post #42

Every mention of Github Actions is an occasion to start looking for the best alternative in , let's go! Is Dagger usable yet? Is there still hope for Earthly? Are general purpose workflow systems winning any time soon, or are we still afraid of writing code? Any new systems out there that cover all the totally basic features like running locally, unlike Github Actions?

Can’t beat GitLab

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#65
post #57

If CI/CD tools were code editors, then Jenkins/JFrog would be like Vi/Vim—powerful and traditional. GitLab CI would resemble Helix or Zed, offering a modern and efficient approach. Meanwhile, GitHub Actions would be akin to VSCode, but with a touch of Dreamweaver CC, blending user-friendly features with comprehensive capabilities.

Have you ever use any of those in a realistic scenario? Any existing CI/CD solution is broken like hell and if you try to do more advanced stuff like reusing templates or actions, all hell breaks lose. Don't get me started on clones via SSH, doing commits from pipelines, etc. CI/CD is one of the topics that is barely solved or usable ...

Actually, I have considerable experience setting up and running various CI/CD tools such as Jenkins, GitLab CI, and Travis CI.

In my experience, GitHub Actions work quite well, especially for smaller projects or when you can avoid using public templates and actions. While shortcuts like third-party libraries or actions can be convenient, they often come with trade-offs.

For scenarios where having your own runners and build images is beneficial, I would recommend GitLab CI.

Jenkins is a great choice if you need to run builds on dedicated hardware or within a virtualized environment.

When discussing the challenges of CI/CD, I often notice that many issues stem from complex chains of dependencies within the software or product itself. For example, consider a release pipeline that typically takes six hours to complete but fails after four hours. In such cases, having to restart the entire pipeline instead of just the failed job can be quite inefficient.

Additionally, debugging can become much easier when you have your own build images on runners, as you can run them locally for testing and troubleshooting.

What specific aspects of CI/CD do you find broken or challenging?

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#66
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How's Jenkins looking these days?

With Git Actions at full speed..... it is dying.

Every org I have spoken with recently are in GH action cost reduction mode -- which always, always, always causes issues.

Jenkins too going away, but, like Windows XP, people often reach back out for it.

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#67
post #5

Just this week I tried giving this another chance to debug some weird CI failures for ruby tests. I’m on M-series macs so there is an inherent platform mismatch. That coupled with us using depot images as action runners. I was never able to get it running past the dry-run stage. There is just a lot of differences between CI runners and my local docker images. I even gave the image from catthehacker a try. Which is li…

GH Actions have always worked flawlessly for me, as long as I don't ever do anything unusual.

Last week I moved from a custom server back to GH Pages + GH Actions, and broke a feature that depended on an out dir existing after one build phase and before another. I have no idea how to fix it. It's probably simple, I'm just burnt out.

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#68
post #47

Dumb question, but why hasn’t GitHub made a solution that lets you run GitHub Actions locally? Or at the very least a solution that validates the action (giving a bit more certainty that it will succeed, a bit like a dry-run)? (My war story:) I stopped using GHAs after an optimistic attempt to save myself five key strokes ‘r’ ‘s’ ‘p’ ‘e’ ‘c’ led to 40+ commits and seeing the sunrise but still no successful test run v…

They do. Your action can be empty and actions generate webhook events. Do whatever you want with the webhook.

It’s the allure of the marketplace that gets people. They’re like “oh I could parse my test report files and upload all of them somewhere and render them with a nice output on my pr! I could spend a week writing and testing all of this or I can slap this action here into the YAML and be done with it in 10 minutes.

The trap and tradeoff is that the thirtieth time you’ve done that is when you realize you’ve screwed yourself and the organization by building this Byzantine half baked DAG with a very sketchy security story that you can’t step through, run locally or test

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#69
post #61
post #42

Every mention of Github Actions is an occasion to start looking for the best alternative in , let's go! Is Dagger usable yet? Is there still hope for Earthly? Are general purpose workflow systems winning any time soon, or are we still afraid of writing code? Any new systems out there that cover all the totally basic features like running locally, unlike Github Actions?

How's Jenkins looking these days?

Seems fine to me, I don't really understand why people think CI is hard and they need to shop a different platform. All these systems are is a glorified shell script runner. It seems like developers just keep making up new DSLs over and over to do the same things.

Re: Run GitHub Actions locally

#70
post #67
post #5

Just this week I tried giving this another chance to debug some weird CI failures for ruby tests. I’m on M-series macs so there is an inherent platform mismatch. That coupled with us using depot images as action runners. I was never able to get it running past the dry-run stage. There is just a lot of differences between CI runners and my local docker images. I even gave the image from catthehacker a try. Which is li…

GH Actions have always worked flawlessly for me, as long as I don't ever do anything unusual. Last week I moved from a custom server back to GH Pages + GH Actions, and broke a feature that depended on an out dir existing after one build phase and before another. I have no idea how to fix it. It's probably simple, I'm just burnt out.

Each job runs on a separate runner. If you want to pass data across, use artifacts to upload and then retrieve the specified file(s).
Post reply on HN