GitHub Actions Reviews

I use GitHub for version control.

I just use GitHub repositories and GitHub Actions.

I have integrated my automation project with GitHub Actions for continuous integration pipelines, allowing the team to make use of my automation scripts. It's essentially a continuous integration tool for us now.

Its integration and deployment are quite easy. You need to create a YAML file in your project, detailing configurations within this file. It integrates itself, requiring you to specify titles, descriptions, parameters, and a trigger scheduler if needed. 

Apart from that, it's just a simple YAML file, so there's no need for complex configurations.

In one project, I used GitHub to automate an application related to email marketing, focusing on actions for data scraping. This required running scripts daily, sometimes even twice or thrice a day. Manually executing these scripts is inefficient and overly reliant on individual team members. 

However, by integrating the project with GitHub Actions, we automated script execution. Triggers were set up to initiate the pipeline automatically with every new commit or push to a branch. 

Additionally, we implemented schedulers to run pipelines at predetermined times, like 9 PM or 2 PM. 

Another enhancement was executing five tests in parallel through data actions, making the process more robust. 

GitHub Actions also offers stepwise execution details, greatly aiding in understanding and managing workflows.

I have optimized job execution time by running test scripts in parallel and creating multiple pipelines; we've significantly reduced execution times. What could take 50 minutes can be cut down to just 8 to 10 minutes through these optimizations.

One feature I am a fan of is version control, which provides a history of every commit, which is a widely used standard. 

Another key aspect is the ease of setting up continuous integration without needing extensive DevOps intervention, thanks to the straightforward creation of YAML files. These features significantly streamline workflow automation.

I also have experience integrating external services with GitHub Actions.

I've integrated Jenkins, which is my go-to tool. GitHub Actions also allows for the integration of third-party tools like Bitbucket, demonstrating its versatility and capability to work seamlessly with a variety of services.

The primary area for improvement I see is in artifact management, especially for saving screenshots or videos from failed tests or data-driven actions. Currently, the configuration for saving these artifacts is complex. 

Simplifying this process would make GitHub Actions even more user-friendly and efficient. 

Other than this aspect, GitHub Actions stands out as an excellent tool for automating and managing workflows.

For additional functionalities, one aspect I'd like to see improved is the integration of performance testing and API automation projects directly within GitHub Actions, without the need for third-party tools. This direct integration would streamline the process significantly.

I have been using it for more than three years. 

GitHub Actions has been quite stable in my experience; I haven't encountered any crashes or significant issues. Therefore, I'd give it a nine out of ten for stability.

I'd rate scalability an eight out of ten. There's always room for improvement, but it's quite good as is.

We have several teams using GitHub Actions, with over a hundred people utilizing it in our projects.

I haven't had the need to contact GitHub support since we've managed to solve our issues internally.

In terms of automation, I use Cypress, Playwright, and Selenium. For API automation, I use Postman and Swagger. For mobile automation, I use Appium and Espresso.

With Postman, we usually test the functionality of APIs, checking their health and performance. Swagger is more for documenting APIs, detailing their purpose, endpoints, and how to trigger them using queries and other aspects.

I use these tools for testing purposes mostly.

The setup process is quite straightforward. It largely depends on the complexity of your needs. 

For basic requirements, it's simple, but more complex setups will naturally require more detailed configuration. 

From my perspective as a QA Automation Engineer, I found it to be quite simple and easy to navigate.

I primarily focus on cloud-based deployments.

It's low-priced. Not high, but definitely low.

I can compare it to Jenkins or Bitbucket.

GitHub Actions stands out for its ease of use, requiring no token generation like Bitbucket and Jenkins. 

It's also more straightforward to integrate, needing only the creation of a YAML file, unlike the manual configurations required for Jenkins and Bitbucket. 

Furthermore, GitHub Actions supports a wide array of libraries and dependencies, simplifying the installation process compared to the more manual integrations needed with Jenkins and Bitbucket. 

These factors make GitHub Actions a more powerful and user-friendly tool in comparison.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I'd definitely recommend it, especially to automation engineers. Once they integrate their automation project with GitHub Actions, they'll find it very useful for various reasons. 

1. The user interface is friendly and engaging.
2. It provides detailed logs for monitoring what's happening behind your code execution.
3. It organizes CI pipeline execution into steps for easier debugging. 

These are some of the key benefits that I believe would be valuable to others.

I use GitHub Actions to automate my development workflows, primarily focusing on tasks such as automating backups by zipping repositories and uploading them to OneDrive. 

Additionally, I use it for unit testing, static code analysis, software composition analysis, and automating Continuous Integration (CI) and Continuous Deployment (CD) pipelines. 

I also use it to deploy Docker applications to AWS Elastic Container Registry (ECR) and automate deployments with Kubernetes.

The most valuable feature of GitHub Actions is the ability to automate various tasks, such as backups and deployments, to ease the development workflow. 

GitHub Actions allow the use of custom runners, which accommodate a range of tasks. Additionally, storing secrets securely via GitHub Secrets ensures safe access to credentials when running pipelines.

The main challenge I've experienced is with integration, particularly uploading to OneDrive, which was more complex compared to Google Drive or AWS S3 bucket. I had to conduct extensive research to find a solution using RClone for configuration. Focusing on making integrations smoother would be beneficial.

I started using GitHub Actions this year, in either January or February.

GitHub Actions is mostly stable, but I did face an issue two weeks ago when GitHub Actions services were down for about six hours, impacting my task timelines. However, such downtimes are expected with cloud platforms.

GitHub Actions operates independently of user management within my projects. The management of GitHub Actions, even with new users coming in, follows the company’s set rules, making scalability efficient with no noticeable limitations.

I used to be a GitLab person, utilizing GitHub when collaborating with an organization last year. However, since my tasks mostly involved source code management, transitioning to GitHub and utilizing GitHub Actions fit my needs better.

I am exploring Jenkins and considering Sequoia CI solutions. I haven't fully explored them enough to provide a detailed comparison.

The initial setup was straightforward, especially when using Visual Studio Code for my Versus Code setups. While starting from the GitHub GUI was a bit confusing initially, I got accustomed to it after a few steps.

There are pricing considerations where exceeding the free hours given in a month incurs additional costs. GitHub provides a free version with certain hours, which seems reasonable for my usage.

I recommend GitHub Actions because it is widely used by organizations for source code management. It is an open-source tool that supports collaboration and offers comprehensive documentation. 

Overall, I would rate GitHub Actions nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for GitHub Actions is for continuous integration and continuous deployment (CICD). Our application is mostly based on Java, and our codes are on GitHub. We have set up a pipeline for CICD that automatically deploys to our test server. We integrated GitHub with Jenkins using GitHub Webhook to take builds and pass parameters, such as push parameters, to trigger jobs.

GitHub Actions has improved team productivity significantly. It has reduced the manual intervention needed, saving both time and effort. The automation of tasks allows our developers to focus more on new tasks rather than repetitive testing phases. It also makes our workflows more efficient, as it automates unit and integration testing, which helps us avoid wasting time.

The most valuable feature of GitHub Actions is its ability to automate processes, eliminating the need for manual interventions. It is user-friendly, with clear and organized processes, making it easy to navigate and work with. Its integration with Jenkins helps streamline our code-building process, ensuring everything is in order without interruptions.

Sometimes it is quite complex to commit code from our local system to the GitHub repository; creating a folder in GitHub can be tedious. Integration with SSH keys in the GitHub account setup could be improved to be more straightforward from a user perspective.

I have been working with GitHub Actions for one or two years.

I have not experienced any downtime or stability issues while using GitHub Actions. It has been stable and reliable.

GitHub Actions is scalable and highly available. We don't face any issues with scalability or downtime.

We have not needed to raise any questions with GitHub technical support, suggesting that the system has been self-sufficient and straightforward.

Positive

I have worked with both GitHub Actions and Jenkins. I didn't get the chance to work with other tools, so I continue to work with these.

The initial setup was easy and straightforward. With all the available plugins for GitHub integration, setting it up with Jenkins was manageable and didn't take much time.

I was responsible for implementing and setting up GitHub Actions in our environment.

I highly recommend GitHub Actions for managing development workflows because it is easy to set up, saves time, and can handle complex tasks efficiently.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We are using GitHub Actions to enhance our CI/CD processes within an AWS environment. Our primary use cases include the deployment of infrastructure, authentication against AWS, GitHub, and Databricks, implementing security checks, and conducting QA tests. 

We utilize the tool for deploying Databricks within AWS and migrating repositories from GitHub. We also use GitHub Actions for setting up centralized workflows, monitoring, Terraform deployment, and security checks.

The automation using GitHub Actions has optimized our workflow by streamlining processes and establishing standardized practices across the organization. It allows our team to work more efficiently by reducing complexities in deployment and integrating enhanced security checks.

The most valuable features of GitHub Actions include its seamless integration within GitHub, which simplifies the CI/CD pipeline setup. The scalability of using different types of runners—both public and private runners—enhances deployment flexibility. The ease with which pipelines can be learned and implemented is also a key feature. GitHub Actions provides a wide range of available services and community actions that cater to various needs.

Improvements could be made in terms of time-saving capabilities and resolving potential complexities in centralized workflows. The challenge lies in maintaining centralized workflows given the potential for outdated or non-functional community actions.

I have been working with GitHub Actions for two years.

The stability of GitHub Actions is commendable, with few downtimes experienced. Issues, when they occur, are typically resolved quickly.

GitHub Actions proves to be scalable, with the ability to edit pipelines easily and address scalability challenges effortlessly.

I have not utilized GitHub Actions' technical support, as most issues can be solved with available resources online.

Positive

Previously, we used Jenkins and AWS CICD automation before switching to GitHub Actions for centralized integration within GitHub and improved efficiency in managing automation.

Setting up GitHub Actions initially was challenging as it required learning a new CI/CD tool and adapting from previous tools. However, the documentation is comprehensive and helpful.

The deployment involved a team of about five people. Two or three people continue to maintain the processes post-deployment.

The solution is open source, making it cost-effective for individual users. However, company usage may depend on its scale and specific requirements.

We chose GitHub Actions as a company standard.

I am currently using GitHub Actions as a tool for our CI/CD pipeline. I was engaged in an e-commerce project where I used GitHub Actions and stored secret data within GitHub Actions secrets and variables.

GitHub Actions streamline our workflows by allowing us to manage production, testing, and live environments in a single directory. It helps automate processes efficiently without much manual intervention.

We can use secrets and variables within GitHub Actions while managing our source code. We can trigger files manually or automate processes. GitHub Actions fit seamlessly with our CI/CD needs, integrating well with other tools we use.

GitHub sometimes makes it difficult to debug actions. Improvements in debugging could enhance its usability greatly.

I am currently using GitHub Actions.

There are frequent stability issues with GitHub, particularly when managing data sets and ensuring all components function correctly. Troubleshooting is sometimes necessary.

GitHub Actions are scalable as we can use them for scalability protocols.

As a technical support approach, issues are addressed directly through client communication. We manage issues arising from clients via direct mail correspondence, thereby handling problems as they occur.

Positive

GitHub Actions provides an easy-to-use interface suitable for beginners, free runners for CI/CD, third-party actions, and cost-effectiveness. Troubleshooting can be challenging, requiring technical knowledge.

The initial setup involves creating a workflow directory and writing YAML files to manage resources, security, and monitoring. We work closely with the development team during setup.

The deployment requires collaboration between frontend, backend, and database teams, along with the use of Terraform and monitoring tools like CloudWatch for effective management.

GitHub Actions can be compared with Jenkins for CI/CD purposes.

I recommend GitHub Actions to other users due to its user-friendly nature, free runner availability, and effective secret management.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I use GitHub Actions to automate deployment processes. I have three environments: a development server, a QA server, and a staging server. 

GitHub Actions runs on each of these servers to manage deployments based on branch events, test cases execution, and integrating with manual testing processes.

GitHub Actions helps automate the deployment process, eliminating manual copying and testing, which saves time and minimizes errors. The use of YAML files makes configuring steps straightforward and ensures reproducibility of workflows. The process is streamlined compared to tools such as Jenkins.

GitHub Actions lacks a feature for automating the build process for mobile applications. I currently rely on GitHub Actions for web applications but have to use another tool for mobile apps.

I have been using GitHub Actions for about two years.

GitHub Actions is very stable. I haven't encountered any technical issues.

I haven't tested GitHub Actions long enough to comment on its scalability, especially in relation to newer implementations like GitHub Copilot.

I have not contacted customer support because I haven't had issues with GitHub Actions.

Positive

I previously used Jenkins for CI/CD workflows before switching to GitHub Actions. I chose GitHub Actions for its integration with other GitHub services, providing a centralized platform.

The initial setup of GitHub Actions is easy. It's an eight out of ten in terms of ease.

I pay approximately five dollars per developer per month. I created a GitHub organization for managing users.

I also evaluated Jenkins and a GitLab solution that is similar to GitHub Actions.

I recommend exploring GitHub Actions, especially if you already use GitHub for code storage and issue management. Everything being in one place simplifies management of code, tasks, and workflow processes. 

I rate GitHub Actions a nine out of ten overall.

Our primary use case for GitHub Actions is for continuous integration and deployment within our repository. We utilize it to build packages and create binaries.

GitHub Actions has improved our organization by being readily available within our repository. It is widely used, and we can easily integrate straightforward YAML, providing clear status updates on failures.

GitHub Actions is valuable for its ease of use and integration. Additionally, we can use our own GitHub runner to perform many tasks such as building packages and creating binaries.

The only issue I have faced is with authorization, particularly when configuring the GitHub token correctly.

I have been using GitHub Actions for approximately three years now.

I have not faced any stability issues with GitHub Actions. It has been reliable without any notable problems.

The scalability of GitHub Actions is good, and we have not faced any issues regarding scalability.

I was using a previous solution before GitHub Actions and switched since GitHub Actions is more favorable in terms of features and integration.

I would advise new users to ensure their secret keys are safe and to set up authorization carefully with GitHub Actions to prevent exposure.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

It's part of an automation process. We develop code in GitHub and use Google Cloud Platform. To do that, we leverage GitHub Actions, which automatically interacts with GitHub, the source code repository, and automates our build, deployment, and deployment processes.

GitHub Actions have been pivotal for automating our software development processes.

We develop in GitHub. Once a feature is built and tested, different Actions help us deploy it to our test environment. We test again, and then with GitHub, we deploy to production with just a click.

The integration is excellent. Having the source code in GitHub and seamlessly using Google Cloud is smooth and secure.

The level of automation achievable is really good. So, the custom workflow creation and Marketplace Actions improved our project's efficiency

The UI could be better. 

I have been using it for two years. 

It's very stable. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. We haven't encountered any major issues.

It is very scalable. We deploy quite large systems successfully.

There are around 200 end users using this solution. 

I used Jenkins before.

The initial setup can require some knowledge, but there are helpful tutorials, examples, courses, and other resources. Overall, it's manageable.

The process varies depending on what's being deployed (data, services, etc.). We use multiple environments with different ports for each microservice. 

It's a complex infrastructure with databases and other components, but Actions makes scaling it up and down and managing its overall complexity surprisingly easy.

Deployments are quick, usually taking a few minutes, up to ten minutes at most. They're one-time jobs, though they might run multiple times a day.

GitHub Actions is our CI/CD tool. We actually use TerraForm for deployment.

It's actually quite user-friendly. Teams can manage it themselves without needing dedicated IT professionals.

The level of automation it offers makes it worth the investment. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.