Comment by Conan_Kudo
11 hours ago
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...
as usual for Microslop products: it's designed for maximum lock-in
everything is including some crappy proprietary yaml rather than using standard tooling
so instead of being a collection of easily composable and testable bits it's a mess that only works on their platform
It seems more of a cultural issue that -- I'm pretty sure -- predates Microsoft's acquisition of GitHub. I assume crappy proprietary yaml can be blamed on use of Ruby. And there seems to be an odd and pervasive "80% is good enough" feel to pretty much everything in GitHub, which is definitely cultural, and I'm pretty sure, also predates Microsoft's acquisition.
GHA is based on Azure Actions. This is evident in how bad its security stance is, since Azure Actions was designed to be used in a more closed/controlled environment.
> I find GitHub Actions abhorrent in a way that I never found a CI/CD system before...
That's just the good old Microsoft effect, they have a reverse-midas-touch when it comes to actually delivering good UX experiences.