ProgrammerHumor
peakGithubActionsExperience
This shit took me 32 commits to get right š
Discussion
It won't work till you stop using words, usually dqfegwhro2 is the right commit, but the main fix was in hbjyrgrehzd
You can try locally with https://github.com/nektos/act but it just reduces the number of trial and error from my experience.. something is inherently and badly designed with GA
This is what makes using GitHub actions decent, throw in linting your GitHub action files and read the damn docs.
Linting is the least issue of it, most of failure comes from inter platform aspect which is impossible to debug unless you start to build it
Act reduces this a bit but you gotta slap a bullet proof environment setup to make it work
I had the same thing. I hate it.
I questioned my life and if CI/CD was a Good idea.
Tbf: I vibe CI/CD-ed
as soon as it works it will be the best idea ever unti it stops again
lmao the existential crisis is real. but once it clicks, it clicks
Tbf: I vibe CI/CD-ed
In my experience the vast majority of people/teams vibe their CI/CD code. That is for two reasons:
1) Most teams donāt have dedicated specialists for this. Largely because itās hard to justify a full-time role for this.
2) Most engineers use the vast majority of their productive work time (after we exclude the time for meetings), to write application code. CI/CD pipelines, once set-up, require very infrequent tampering. By the time you come to tamper with it, you have forgotten most of what you learned from previous tampering sessions. So you canāt write/amend it in a reasonable timeframe, without resorting to help from AI again.
It is also my opinion that for the above reasons, and because it never brings anyone any joy to write it, it is totally acceptable to vibe/prompt engineer you CI/CD code.
did god forbid you from using nektos/act
Iām ngl, u just saved a life by putting me on ts, thanks š
I had similar experience because I didn't know about 'act back then :P
On other hand, local runner configuration for windows pipelines with secrets sounds somewhat scary. Sometimes it's easier to throw actions at the wall))
I had the same experience when asking AI to build workflows for my repo :))))
what did we learn
Just read the docs
You learned well.
What an exchange. XD
At least GitLab has a built in ci linter. But no, who decided that submitting a dsl defined job to a central system was a good idea? Certainly not someone who'd worked on mainframes.
Ever heard of fixup commits and rebasing? There are of course many ways to do it. (Arguably) the easiest is to use fixup commits to fix these linter errors and once the CI is green, squash them with āgit rebase āautosquash masterā
You will need to do a force push afterwards, but you will have a perfectly nice pristine commit.
I would suggest everyone to get to know rebasing. There is a lot of cool stuff you can do.
I don't think the problem at hand is the commit history.Ā
There's no need to force push. You can branch and work on the CI only and then squash merge locally or through a merge/pull request.
man i had the same thing but on someone elses repo :sob: my man messaged me with a screenshot of like 30 failed jobs XD
Try until it works Copy in another place manually Revert back to the first try Paste the working files back into the repo ... Profit
if i were to mess with ci, i make sure to always amend extra changes, wouldn't want anyone to know i failed
The worst is trying to make changes to the action and testing it without committing the incomplete workflow changes to main
workflow_dispatch is your friend
TIL what SMH means, I am so disappointed
Use something likeĀ https://mxschmitt.github.io/action-tmate/Ā to ssh into your actions and debug them
I'm glad I don't understand and use GitHub enough to identify what's the errors are and why they are happening.
I simply create my project add features and push.
bash
git add .
git commit -m "Message"
git push
Is the only thing I use generally š
git commit --amend
git push -f
WTF I WAS LITERALLY DOING THIS YESTERDAY
My org has a rule that you can't push to main without approval (which is normally fair), so any time I have to edit a workflow I have to open a PR and find someone to approve it. Very annoying when setting them up.
Change my mind. Git commits are not the right way to develop CI.
please use conventional commits:
ci: pls fucking work odjqoadiuwhshhwqiqlqn RRAHHH