TBH this discussion and the need for a lockfile for your CI makes me dizzy, is there something I'm missing wrt GHA that makes it awesome enough to be worth these tradeoffs?
For reference, I come from a Gitlab CI background and all I want is to specify a container, and the CI system should clone my repo in it and run some tests; perhaps optionally allow me to write stuff in a text file that can be displayed on the pull request or the commit (although Gitlab CI doesn't do that AFAIK). Is there something I'm missing due to which GHA architecture is so complicated?
From what I see, this does not help with pinning the dependencies and it doesn’t verify the downloaded action has the same content as it used to have. In other words, this is a tiny patch on a big wound.
We use commit hashes to pin actions, have the version as a comment (e.g # v4) and renovate will keep both up to date in the PRs.
And there is a more or less recently added repository setting to require actions to be pinned to hashes.
Pinning actions doesn't really work because most action dependencies are unpinned thanks to npm default behaviour of not pinning them.
Another (more complete? maintenance, security checks) solution is to allow renovatebot handle this for you. Enable this preset: https://docs.renovatebot.com/presets-helpers/#helperspingith...
..and in the next update cycle, you will see all actions be pinned like this:
- uses: actions/checkout@8e8c483db84b4bee98b60c0593521ed34d9990e8 # v6
Why do you need this?
Just pin your actions to shasum
https://github.com/suzuki-shunsuke/pinact works great
I have been banging on that drum for like 2 years now, glad the community has figured a way around it. Still utterly ridiculous that this is not native.
They even closed the immutable action issue as a "wont fix" cause you know when it's too hard we all know the best way is to give up. Not like there wasany major security incident this year due to this /s
Mildly ironic that the quickstart suggests starting with an unpinned action
gjtorikian/gh-actions-lockfile@v1
Presumably since it has to run first it must run unpinned?