alt Hacker News > For the love of all that is holy, don’t let GitHub Actions
> manage your logic. Keep your scripts under your own damn
> control and just make the Actions call them!
Honestly, I wonder if a better workflow definition would just have a single input: a single command to run. Remove the temptation to actually put logic in the actions workflow.
Replies
This is basically how most other CI systems work. GitLab CI, Jenkins, Buildbot, Cirrus CI, etc. are all other systems I've used and they work this way.
I find GitHub Actions abhorrent in a way that I never found a CI/CD system before...
> I think everyone that's ever used GitHub actions has come to this conclusion
This is not even specific to GitHub Actions. The logic goes into the scripts, and the CI handles CI specific stuff (checkout, setup tooling, artifacts, cache...). No matter which CI you use, you're in for a bad time if you don't do this.
> I think everyone that's ever used GitHub actions has come to this conclusion.
I agree that that should be reasonable but unfortunately I can tell you that not all developers (including seniors) naturally arrive at such conclusion no.
I thought that's how actions are supposed to work. Python is king. Just use the Actions script to feed your variables.
This is how we did things with Jenkins and gitlab runners before, idk why folks would do it differently for GHA.
If you can't run the same scripts locally (minus external hosted service/API) then how do you debug them w/o running the whole pipeline?