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

Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

resources.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

811–820 of 853 posts

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#811

Post by replete »

esafak wrote: post #234
golovast wrote: post #131

I got contacted by our rep a couple weeks ago, who informed me of this news. I thought it was a disaster and it really pissed me off. The rep couldn't even explain the reasoning well. It basically summed up to "because we can" and "where are you going to go?". He was shocked to find out that I didn't like it. We currently self-host on kubernets/aws. The thing that really got to me isn't the new charge per se. It's th…

Any official Github action today: "Thank you for your interest in this GitHub action, however, right now we are not taking contributions. We continue to focus our resources on strategic areas that help our customers be successful while making developers' lives easier. While GitHub Actions remains a key part of this vision, we are allocating resources towards other areas of Actions and are not taking contributions to…

They are focusing on an Azure migration for then next 2 years...

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#812

Post by brightball »

throwaway150 wrote: post #455

It is us, developers, who convinced our management to purchase GitHub Enterprise to be our forge. We didn't pay any heed to the values of software freedom. A closed source, proprietary software had good features. We saw that and convinced our management to purchase it. Never mind what cost it would impose in the future when the good software gets bad owners. Never mind that there were alternatives that were inferior…

I honestly don't have any issue paying the self-hosted runner fee. Paying it and counting it against our total allocated minutes when we bought the machine is going too far though.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#813

Post by itintheory »

falsedan wrote: post #802
sunnyday_002 wrote: post #740

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pin the action's version via a digest and use Renovate for updates. You can run all your CI locally if you don't embed your logic into the workflows, just use CI for orchestation. Use an env manager(Mise, Nix etc) to install tooling(you'll get consistency across your team & with CI) and call out to a task runner(scripts, Make, Task etc).

> You can run all your CI locally if you can, you don't need CI. we can't (too slow, needs an audit trail)

I think the idea is GitHub actions calls "build.sh", or "deploy.sh" etc. Those scripts contain all of the logic necessary to build or deploy or whatever. You can run those scripts locally for testing / development, or from CI for prod / auditing.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#814

Post by anchochilis »

bostik wrote: post #809
anchochilis wrote: post #774

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you're missing is maintenance, security, scaling, and protection from data loss. Bespoke CI is easy to build but no one wants to be in charge of rolling out a critical security patch to that on-prem box no one's touched since that consultant from 2 years ago.

Your CI has to be fully codified, stateless and possible to redeploy with a single command. That's the only way it can remain sustainable. No persistent hidden state, no manual configs (even as an option!) and automatically rebuilt on every release as the new version is deployed. As a really big bonus, that also makes your CI testable. In the previous job, we built such a thing: https://smarketshq.com/building-a-repr…

Yes, totally agreed in theory, and it sounds like y'all built a great solution for your use case. But it takes substantial effort and discipline to do something like that at scale.

At some point, you develop complex interdependencies with other systems. You need sophisticated caching for optimum build performance. Techniques like GitOps are unsustainable at a certain number of engineers/commits per hour.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#815

Post by verdverm »

regularmother wrote: post #418
verdverm wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any good CI systems to begin with? joking, but not really Jenkins has been rock solid, we are trying to migrate to Argo Workflows/Events, but there are a complaints (like deploying argo workflows with helm, such fun!)

I've been using dagger.io and it's been really nice to work with. - runs locally - has a language server: python, typescript, go, java, OR elixer - has static typing - the new caching mechanisms introduced in 0.19.4 are chef's kiss I do not work for dagger and pay for it using the company credit card. A breath of fresh air after the unceasing misery and pain that is Gitlab and GHA.

I use Dagger as well, since v0.1.2, even worked on the CUE stuff around then with them.

I wouldn't call it a CI system though, but certainly the philosophy that local and CU should be running the same thing saves many hours of frustration.

I'm currently using Dagger to create forkable/rewindable agent sessions and environments (not with their agent nonsense). Dagger is a pretty sweet piece of tech, so many uses for programmatic container layers

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#816

Post by verdverm »

pxc wrote: post #428
verdverm wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

self-hosted, so same story? I'm not a fan of nix and would have picked containers regardless for a git forge CI offering

It is containers. It's based on Nixery, which is a virtual Docker registry where it puts together containers for you on the fly containing whatever packages you want from Nixpkgs.

By containers I mean I get to define my CI environment with containers, not nix or that somewhere under the hood containers are being used

Like Argo or Jenkins. Pushing nix as the DX for GHA equivalent was a poor choice by Tangled IMO. It's too unusual for your average dev, I'm not interested in learning nix so I can use CI.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#817

Post by __float »

mukundesh wrote: post #777
Schnitz wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub isn’t even good, it’s just the mediocre default everybody uses. PRs were fantastic and the best thing ever - 15 years ago!

GitHub Actions are amazing ! For a public repository who will give you a free machine to run for 6 hours at a stretch for a job !!

This thread is largely commentary on the technical aspects of GitHub Actions.

The fact the business gives away free compute is irrelevant and more a discussion of their marketing budget.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#818

Post by __float »

terom wrote: post #801
shawabawa3 wrote: post #669

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not at all a fan of GitHub actions, but come on, Hudson/Jenkins was a nightmare world, GitHub actions is a million times better

Working with Jenkins CasC, JobDSL and declarative pipelines, I'm not sure where the million times comes from. Sure, there are some annoying parts, and GHA has the social network for reusable actions, but apart from that it's not that different. Oldschool maven type jobs where you type shell script into a ` `? Yeah, let's not talk about those, but we don't have a single one left anymore.

Jenkins Groovy is awful and full of footguns. Have you ever run into a serialization exception?

It's too powerful and there are too many of its implementation details exposed to the user.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#819

Post by benced »

olafmol wrote: post #724
benced wrote: post #583

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CircleCI charges for concurrent job runs (which include self-hosted runs), no? They (you, I guess) obfuscate that by saying you get "Unlimited" if you take the "Talk to sales" route but that's not the same as not charging.

It's not obfuscated. The free plan gives you a max of 5 concurrent self-hosted runners. If you need more you can upgrade your plan: https://circleci.com/pricing/#comparison-table There simply is no free lunch, somewhere someone needs to spend effort and time on managing the orchestration layer for the runners, and there is also network traffic and storage in play that costs money. If you need a future-proof CI/CD pla…

Agreed there's no free lunch, GH is moving from more generous than the industry to as-generous (or less-generous depending on your opinion of per-minute versus per-job).

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#820

Post by brian_cunnie »

NamlchakKhandro wrote: post #686
Schnitz wrote: post #601

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub isn’t even good, it’s just the mediocre default everybody uses. PRs were fantastic and the best thing ever - 15 years ago!

100% don't understand why people think github actions are terrible. everything else is trash. Github Actions changed the landscape. They're composable. The only two other things that come close is Concourse.CI and CircleCi.... and circle-ci is 100% trash

Thumbs up on Concourse CI: I like seeing all my builds at once on any easy-to-read dashboard. That’s why we switched from GitHub actions: the dashboard.
Post reply on HN