logoalt Hacker News

dvhyesterday at 10:31 AM6 repliesview on HN

There's one thing I don't understand. Isn't GitHub action just "take a repo, do something with it, save something somewhere". So how is it different than writing a bash script that "clones the repo, do something with it, pushes the changes back"? If actions became paid feature, wouldn't that just generated myriads of show hn posts like "I recreated GitHub actions in xyz"?


Replies

benterixyesterday at 10:48 AM

Yes, in theory any CI/CD (whether Github, Gitlab, Jenkins etc,) is just a shell script with some warpping. But this wrapping matters because it's convenience: how you integrate with the repo, how you deal with variables, secrets, caching, deployment security and so on. Some people roughly figured this out and proposed some ways which other people learned, so switching is always a bit of a pain in various ways. But it is definitely possible - I did quite a lot of pipeline migration in my life and this is definitely not a blocker for a project of small to medium to biggish-size.

000ooo000yesterday at 10:35 AM

Where does one get to suffer YAML hell then??

show 1 reply
ClikeXyesterday at 1:41 PM

Yes, and there are several tools that do just that already. The thing Github Actions offers is logging and storage of artifacts.

This change is a very weird one. Because the teams that are capable of setting up their own runners have the means to easily jump ship to another CI platform and skip these fees altogether.

CafeRaceryesterday at 10:31 AM

It's like bash scripts, but with ability to debug them.

show 1 reply
franktankbankyesterday at 2:03 PM

Yea but a bash script isn't declarative so thats somehow bad.

(DECLARATIVE CI WHY?????)

show 1 reply