paths-filter
act
paths-filter | act | |
---|---|---|
8 | 146 | |
1,843 | 50,324 | |
- | 1.8% | |
6.0 | 9.2 | |
11 days ago | 3 days ago | |
TypeScript | Go | |
MIT License | MIT License |
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.
paths-filter
-
How to commit part of file in Git
I also set up recently the policy to onl use merge commits on stable branch, as otherwise the path filter^1 in the workflows would not detect correctly which files changed in a PR.
[1] https://github.com/dorny/paths-filter
-
GitHub Actions as a time-sharing supercomputer
I truly don't understand why this isn't more widely discussed (I've seen several "GH Actions Gotchas" where this isn't mentioned). Many of the community actions also seem to be designed to run as short jobs to paper around missing features (for ex: https://github.com/dorny/paths-filter ), that end up eating up an enormous amount of your minutes budget.
-
Deploy Lambda only when there are code changes
If that isn’t sufficient, there are a number of third party workflow steps that enable conditional builds with extra flexibility like https://github.com/dorny/paths-filter
-
Is there a GitHub Actions equivalent to CircleCI dynamic config?
You can use paths-filter to give yourself a bunch of conditional outputs to test against for separate jobs.
-
Turborepo + GitHub Actions
That's brilliant. dorny/paths-filter looks like it can eliminate my enumerate job, and then I don't have to concern myself with all this data passing between jobs.
-
GitHub Actions Pitfalls
There’s an awkward gotcha/incompatibility between “Required status checks” and workflows that get skipped [1], eg due to setting a “paths” property of a push/pull_request workflow trigger [2].
The checks associated with the workflow don’t run and stay in a pending state, preventing the PR from being merged.
The only workaround I’m aware of is to use an action such as paths-filter [3] instead at the job level.
A further, related frustration/limitation - you can _only_ set the “paths” property [2] at the workflow level (i.e. not per-job), so those rules apply to all jobs in the workflow. Given that you can only build a DAG of jobs (ie “needs”) within a single workflow, it makes it quite difficult to do anything non trivial in a monorepo.
[1]: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/configuring-branches...
[2]: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/workflow-...
[3]: https://github.com/dorny/paths-filter
-
Configuring python linting to be part of CI/CD using GitHub actions
We are interested in running a linter only against the modified files. Let's say, we take a look at the provided repo, if I update dags/dummy.py I don't want to waste time and resources running the linter against main.py. For this purpose we use Paths Filter GitHub Action, which is very flexible.
-
Introducing Gistblog 🎉: Blog your little ❤️ out using GitHub Gists
In the spirit of the #ActionsHackathon21, you can see I'm taking advantage of the checkout action GitHub provides and the Paths Filter action by dorny to create the desired workflow. I'm also using the Gistblog Action I created for this hackathon which handles managing all the blog posts as Gists. I'd like to explore Composite actions soon to see if I can reduce all of this to a single action making setup even easier.
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
What are some alternatives?
runner-images - GitHub Actions runner images
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]
changed-files - :octocat: Github action to retrieve all (added, copied, modified, deleted, renamed, type changed, unmerged, unknown) files and directories.
cache - Cache dependencies and build outputs in GitHub Actions
actionlint - :octocat: Static checker for GitHub Actions workflow files
dagger - Application Delivery as Code that Runs Anywhere
test-reporter - Displays test results from popular testing frameworks directly in GitHub
earthly - Super simple build framework with fast, repeatable builds and an instantly familiar syntax – like Dockerfile and Makefile had a baby.
travis-yml - Travis CI build config processing
action-tmate - Debug your GitHub Actions via SSH by using tmate to get access to the runner system itself.
gh-valet - Valet helps facilitate the migration of Azure DevOps, CircleCI, GitLab CI, Jenkins, and Travis CI pipelines to GitHub Actions.
LSPatch - LSPatch: A non-root Xposed framework extending from LSPosed