GitHub Actions Reviews

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.

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.

One way I use it is to commit code and then take it from there to create pipelines.   

When we use GitHub Actions for continuous integration (CI), we commit code, and a test pipeline is automatically triggered. This runs automated tests and generates reports. We then manually review the reports and run additional tests if needed.

The main benefit is collaboration. It allows us to easily collaborate with other developers, regardless of location. For example, we can collaborate with both our African and German colleagues seamlessly. It's platform-agnostic, so it is flexible and not tied to any OS, so we can work on Linux, Windows, web, and even Oracle applications. It's flexible, reliable, and overall an excellent tool for our needs.

There's the same patch feature that makes it easier for developers in the IDE.  

It seamlessly connects developers, and it can automate the task of initializing the pipeline.

It is flexible enough and integrates well with other third-party solutions and tools. The solution has positively affected the speed and reliability of the software release cycle. It is very reliable.

There is a part that detects outdated libraries. If that feature could be more intuitive and informative, that would be nice.

I've been using it for a couple of years now. It has been two years now. 

It is a pretty stable solution. There are hardly any defects, so it is good. 

It is a scalable solution. There are around 40 end users in our company using it. We have plans to increase the further usage of the product. 

The initial setup is very easy. It took less than an hour to set up. 

It can be done in-house. It is really easy. Anyone can Google it. It's really not that complex.

One DevOps engineer is enough for deployment and maintenance. 

I did not have to pay for it, for our basic usage, we didn't have to pay. However, there are additional functionalities for Git Large File Storage (Git LFS) and enterprise plans, but I'm not familiar with those specifics.

As our data volume increased, we started paying because we're now on the enterprise level handling gigabytes of information. So, we do pay for it now due to our enterprise usage.  

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. I would recommend using it. I would advise to test it out, try it out. 

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.

It works excellently. Instead of having an additional CI/CD tool, we find this specific data backend tool highly beneficial. Within this data backend tool, we possess data burners, such as DNS hit creation, and within these data burners, we can conduct all build and release tasks, except for the more complicated ones like clicking. This provides a significant advantage, allowing us to automate and script processes across various environments effortlessly. I highly recommend using data backend actions for these purposes.

Creating workflows in YAML format is straightforward and easy to comprehend. This includes both understanding and writing workflows. Additionally, the downloading aspect for third-party instances can also be easily done. It's worth noting that vulnerability analysis and similar tasks should be part of our automation through data workflows. Furthermore, we can break down our processes step by step, starting from building, then moving on to analysis, testing, and finally deploying in production and the clear environment. All of these tasks can be efficiently managed within this platform.            

We can leverage this database tool to manage everything within our environment and data burners, allowing for customization and execution. An additional advantage is the capability to modify aspects like file size, making processes more efficient and faster across the pipelines. Regarding improvements or implementations, I believe there should be enhancements made to the deployment tool. It should be integrated as part of the solution.

Infrastructure-wise, we already have tools like GitHub and RobSpot, and data enables us to automate various processes, which is quite beneficial. As for further enhancements, I'm uncertain. I've shared everything I know. However, if there's something specific you'd like to see in future releases, a feature that may not exist yet but would be desirable, I can't provide any input on that matter.

We have been using GitHub Actions for sometime.

The solution is stable so I would rate it 10 out of 10. 

It is highly scalable, so I would rate it 10 out of 10. 

Technical support is good but it can be improved. 

Neutral

There are several steps in our process that need to be followed. First, we perform local testing on our proprietary branches. Then, we transition to the development phase, where we create a full request and merge it into the main branch. Following that, we move to the release branch after review and discussions. Once it's uploaded, the main branch becomes the pre-release branch, and similar teams across the globe apply their changes. Every fifteen days, in line with agile practices, we conduct a COC meeting to discuss and deploy to the main branch. Once everything is in order within the release branch, we proceed to the production environment within the AWS cluster.I would rate the solution 8 out of 10, so it is easy. 

It is free and open platform, so I would rate it 1 out of 10. 

I would rate the overall solution 10 out of 10. 

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.

GitHub Actions was used as the main CI/CD component to manage the deployment of a new application in the cloud and the release of new code.

GitHub Actions can be easily configured, especially for environment variables and secrets. The UI is understandable and user-friendly for setting up CI/CD pipelines. I prefer tools like GitLab, where the pipeline starts quickly and is accessible near the commits for easy access. However, many CI/CD tools are interchangeable due to similar features of GitHub Actions and other similar tools.

The minor drawback of GitHub Actions is the management of the dashboard and pipeline runs, which needs improvement. The dashboard for running pipelines could be better.

I have been using GitHub Actions for more than a year.

In terms of stability, it is stable based on my experience. I would rate the stability a seven out of ten, but there might be more stable options like Jenkins.

GitHub Actions handles the scalability demands of my projects through various jobs, making it easy to scale between workloads.

Overall, I rate GitHub Actions ten out of ten.

Although the dashboard for running pipelines could be better, the primary tool is quite good. I would recommend this tool for those considering GitHub Actions.

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.