act
lighthouse-ci
act | lighthouse-ci | |
---|---|---|
146 | 18 | |
50,324 | 6,272 | |
1.5% | 0.8% | |
9.2 | 7.1 | |
about 13 hours ago | 6 days ago | |
Go | JavaScript | |
MIT License | Apache License 2.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
act
-
Create a Custom GitHub Action in Rust
To speed up your development cycle, install and use the act tool to test-run your action directly in your development environment. This tool lets you invoke a GitHub workflow right on your local machine and will save you the round-trips of pushing each change to GitHub to see if it works.
-
How to debug GitHub actions. Real-world example
When it comes to the alternatives to tmate, there is another great debugging tool that you could check out. It is called act and it allows you to run GitHub Actions code on your local machine making debugging even easier. It has its own limitations and some learning curve but overall it is another tool you should use if you can’t fix the CI bugs by connecting directly into the running action with the tmate.
-
Using my new Raspberry Pi to run an existing GitHub Action
Link: https://github.com/nektos/act
-
Show HN: Open-source x64 and Arm GitHub runners. Reduces GitHub Actions bill 10x
Could you upload your build of GitHub's runner image to Docker Hub?
This would be quite useful for users of other GitHub Actions clones like act [0].
[0]: https://github.com/nektos/act
-
Git commit messages are useless
> These kinds of commit messages are typically an indicator of a broken process where somebody needs to commit to see something happen, like a deployment or build process, and aren't able to assert that stuff works locally.
This is one of my biggest pet peeves with services like github actions. Something running locally like "act" [1] isn't sufficient because it doesn't have everything github has and is extra friction anyway to get everyone to use it for testing.
[1] https://github.com/nektos/act
-
Essential Command Line Tools for Developers
View on GitHub
-
What’s with DevOps engineers using `make` of all things?
If you use Github actions, act is incredibly useful. It can be used to test your GH actions, but also serves as an interface for running tasks locally.
-
Streamlining CI/CD Pipelines with Code: A Developer's Guide
That's something that often is difficult or basically impossible. Except for maybe GitHub actions through Act (https://github.com/nektos/act). I'd still lean to something in the yaml sphere if it eventually would be used in deployment pipelines and such. For example a solution incorporating ansible.
It also seems to me that the argument you make is mostly focused on the building step? Earthly certainly seems focused on that aspect.
-
GitHub Actions Are a Problem
I feel I'm being trolled, but I'll bite and accept the resulting downvotes
I don't think treating every mention of act as an opportunity for airing of personal grievances is helpful in a discussion when there's already ample reports of people's concrete issues with it, had one looked at the 800 issues in its repo https://github.com/nektos/act/issues?q=is%3Aissue or the 239 from gitea's for https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner/issues or whatever is going on with Forgejo's fork https://code.forgejo.org/forgejo/act .
But, as for me specifically, there are two and a half answers: I wanted to run VSCodium's build locally, which act for sure puked about. Then, while trying to troubleshoot that, I thought I'd try something simpler and have it run the lint job from act's own repo <https://github.com/nektos/act/blob/1252e551b8672b1e16dc8835d...> to rule out "you're holding it wrong" type junk. It died with
[checks/lint] Failure - Main actions/setup-go@v3
-
How Steve Jobs Saved Apple with the Online Apple Store
https://twitter.com/mitsuhiko/status/1720410479141487099 :
> GitHub Actions currently charges $0.16 per minute* for the macOS M1 Runners. That comes out to $84,096 for 1 machine year*
GitHub Runner is written in Go; it fetches tasks from GitHub Actions and posts the results back to the Pull Request that spawned the build.
nektos/act is how Gitea Actions builds GitHub Actions workflow YAML build definition documents. https://github.com/nektos/act
https://twitter.com/MatthewCroughan/status/17200423527675700... :
> This is the macOS Ventura installer running in 30 VMs, in 30 #nix derivations at once. It gets the installer from Apple, automates the installation using Tesseract OCR and TCL Expect scripts. This is to test the repeatability. A single function call `makeDarwinImage`.
With a Multi-Stage Dockerfile/Containerfild, you can have a dev environment like xcode or gcc+make in the first stage that builds the package, and then the second stage the package is installed and tested, and then the package is signed and published to a package repo / app store / OCI container image repository.
SLSA now specifies builders for signing things correctly in CI builds with keys in RAM on the build workers.
"Build your own SLSA 3+ provenance builder on GitHub Actions" https://slsa.dev/blog/2023/08/bring-your-own-builder-github
lighthouse-ci
-
help needed with lighthouse ci for angular, github actions, PROTOCOL_TIMEOUT: (Method: Debugger.disable)
- referred to https://github.com/GoogleChrome/lighthouse/issues/6512 but didnt see network.disable error - added staticdistdir as per https://github.com/GoogleChrome/lighthouse-ci/blob/main/docs/configuration.md,
-
Continuous performance audits in Nuxt with Lighthouse CI and Github Actions
This approach would suit most of the cases however to achieve more accurate performance audits you should be conducting Lighthouse tests on a dedicated server to avoid results being affected by the machine capabilities. In other words, if you are running Lighthouse audits on a repository where there are several pull requests/workflows/pushes going on, the result of this audit may not be accurate and this is what we want to avoid. For that you would need a separate machine with Lighthouse Server installed on it. So on a pull request you would trigger this machine to conduct a performance audit and return response to your repository.
-
Measuring Page Speed with Lighthouse
And finally, Lighthouse has a CI version you can run in your continuous integration. We’ll use this method to schedule periodical benchmarks.
-
Ensure your Next.js app's performance is top-notch with Lighthouse CI and GitHub Actions
TLDR; I use the Google Chrome Lighthouse CI with a .lighthouserc json configuration to test next start. The Lighthouse CI GitHub app is used to return a pass or fail status check in a PR.
-
Everything you need to know about Web Performance (in 5 Minutes)
You should also incorporate performance checks into your CI/CD pipeline. Use Lighthouse CI to run a synthetic Lighthouse test on each PR (PS: Learn why you shouldn't believe the Lighthouse score alone) and bundlesize package to raise alerts if your bundle size exceeds a certain threshold. For more nuanced data you should use WebPageTest.
-
Accessibility Automation tool for CI pipeline
You can also run Google’s Lighthouse CI tool against multiple URLs, and then hook that up to their self-hosted dashboard service: https://github.com/GoogleChrome/lighthouse-ci
-
Understanding SEO and Web Vitals for your NextJS site and how to improve them?
You can also set up lighthouse-ci as a github action to evaluate the web vitals on push or in pull requests.
-
You’re probably using Lighthouse wrong: How we got tricked by a single magic number
You can have more consistent results if you set up Lighthouse CI in an external environment to test your page or use tools like SpeedCurve, but if you need to quickly inspect a website, I suggest taking a look at Page Speed Insights.
-
Frontend Testing: No more Unit/Integration/E2E categorizations and priorities
This name is already self-explanatory, and developers just need to run Lighthouse or its CI.
-
I built an open-source tool that scans your entire website with Google Lighthouse (unlighthouse.dev)
They also have a powerful CI tool (https://github.com/GoogleChrome/lighthouse-ci) with custom timelines, may look to implement it at some point
What are some alternatives?
reverse-rdp-windows-github-actions - Reverse Remote Desktop into Windows on GitHub Actions for Debugging and/or Job Introspection [GET https://api.github.com/repos/nelsonjchen/reverse-rdp-windows-github-actions: 403 - Repository access blocked]
pa11y - Pa11y is your automated accessibility testing pal
cache - Cache dependencies and build outputs in GitHub Actions
WebdriverIO - Next-gen browser and mobile automation test framework for Node.js
dagger - Application Delivery as Code that Runs Anywhere
lighthouse - Automated auditing, performance metrics, and best practices for the web.
earthly - Super simple build framework with fast, repeatable builds and an instantly familiar syntax – like Dockerfile and Makefile had a baby.
nightwatch - Integrated end-to-end testing framework written in Node.js and using W3C Webdriver API. Developed at @browserstack
action-tmate - Debug your GitHub Actions via SSH by using tmate to get access to the runner system itself.
WebPageTest.api-nodejs - WebPageTest API wrapper for NodeJS
LSPatch - LSPatch: A non-root Xposed framework extending from LSPosed
pa11y-ci - Pa11y CI is a CI-centric accessibility test runner, built using Pa11y