GHA is quite empowering for solo devs. I just dev on my tiny machine and outsource all heavy work to GHA, and basically let Claude rip on the errors, rinse repeat.

I'll be that guy.

For what boils down to a personal take, light on technicalities, this reads like uncannily impersonal, prolonged attempt at dramatic writing.

If you believe the dates in this blog, it's totally different in tone, style, and wording to a safely distant 2021 post (https://www.iankduncan.com/personal/2021-10-04-garbage-in-ne...).

It made me feel paranoid just in about three paragraphs. I apologize to the author if I'm wrong but we all understand what my gut tells me.

Things I dislike about GHA (on Enterprise Server)

* Workflows are only registered once pushed to main, impossible to test the first runs in a branch.

* MS/GH don't care much about GHES as they do github.com, I think they'd like to see it just die. Massive lack of feature parity.

* Labels: If any of your workflows trigger from a label, they ALL DO. You can't target labels only to certain workflows, they all run and then cancel, polluting your checks.

* Deployments: What is a deployment even doing? There is no management to deploy.

* Statefulness: No native way to store state between runs in the same workflow or PR, you would think you could save some sort of state somewhere but you have to manage it all yourself with manifests or something else.

I can go on

> You’ve upgraded the engine but you’re still driving the car that catches fire when you turn on the radio.

And fixing the pyro-radio bug will bring other issues, for sure, so they won't because some's workflow will rely on the fact that turning on the radio sets the car on fire: https://xkcd.com/1172/

>the GitHub Actions log viewer is the only one that has crashed my browser. Not once. Repeatedly. Reliably.

Well, THIS blog post page reliably eats the CPU on scrolling, and the scrolling is very jerky, despite it has only text and no other visible elements.

I think we can honestly remove the word Actions in the headline and still agree.

It used to be fast ish!

Now it's full ugh.

I run a company that uses Nix for everything.

We're running GitHub Actions. It's good. All the real logic is in Nix, and we mostly use our own runners. The rest of the UI that GitHub Actions provides is very nice.

We previously used a CI vendor which specialised in building Nix projects. We wanted to like it, but it was really clunky. GitHub Actions was a significant quality of life improvement for us.

None of my colleagues have died. GitHub Actions is not killing my engineering team at any rate.

@dang can we get this renamed to "GitHub Actions could be better"

Happy user of GitLab CI here.

I see the appeal of GitHub for sharing open source - the interface is so much cleaner and easier to find all you are looking for (GitLab could improve there).

But for CI/CD GitHub doesn’t even come close to GitLab in the usability department, and that’s before we even talk about pricing and the free tiers. People need to give it a try and see what they are missing.

“Microsoft is where ambitious developer tools go to become enterprise SKUs“

It’s hard to remember, sometimes, that Microsoft was one of the little gadflies that buzzed around annoying the Big Guys.