pipeline VS NUKE

Tekton

Tekton is an open-source framework for creating efficient CI/CD systems. This empowers developers to seamlessly construct, test, and deploy applications across various cloud environments and on-premise setups.

Despite other alternatives like Circle CI, Travis CI, GitLab CI or even self-hosted options using open-source projects like Tekton or Argo Workflow, the reason for choosing GitHub Actions was straightforward: GitHub Actions, in conjunction with the GitHub ecosystem, offers a user-friendly experience and access to a rich software marketplace.

[2]: https://github.com/tektoncd/pipeline/issues/5507#issuecommen...

Drone, or Tekton, Argo Workflows if you’re on k8s

If you want a step up, I would recommend trying out Tekton Pipelines. It’s a very popular ci tool, and it runs on Kubernetes. Yes, this would involve setting up a Kubernetes cluster but please don’t run for the hills! You can setup a Kubernetes cluster and install Tekton on top of it with minimal setup using minikube (see here. This would be a great joint exercise as it will give you a bit of Kubernetes understanding alongside it, and the mechanisms of Tekton are a little trickier than GitHub actions imo. It’s all much the same though.

I've recently found this quote by Kelsey Hightower:

"I'm convinced the majority of people managing infrastructure just want a PaaS. The only requirement: it has to be built by them."

Source: https://twitter.com/kelseyhightower/status/85193508753294540...

In the last few weeks, I've experimented a bit with Flux (https://fluxcd.io/), Tekton (https://tekton.dev/) and Cloud Native Buildpacks (https://buildpacks.io/) on how to provide K8s powered git push deployments without using a dedicated CI/CD server.

My project is still in early alpha stage and just a proof of concept :-) My vision is to expand it into an Open Source PaaS in the future.

Do you think the above quote is true? What does an open source PaaS need to be like in order to be accepted by software developers?

Some other projects have been discontinued in the past (like Flynn or Deis) or were created before the Kubernetes era.

Is it the right direction to provide a Heroku like solution based on K8s or is it better to provide an Open Source Infrastructure as Code library with building blocks to avoid everything from scratch?

Is it similar to Nuke?

Another thing I could recommend is to use something like Nuke build system to automate more complex tasks that aren't good fit for csproj using C# code (for example - publishing and zipping self-contained release of some service for specific platform using current date and time or commit hash as version number).

testcontainers and https://github.com/dotnet/Docker.DotNet are on my to-do list to try out, but just like with something like https://nuke.build/ i can't see the value other than that the config would be c# instead of some flavour of yaml.

We started using https://nuke.build/. Early days so can’t comment too much but it seems good so far.

I think you're giving a really bad example of what consumers should expect from open-source projects. This year I reworked the whole website, released several versions, did a huge chunk of development, and spoke at 5 events (with travel). This is the first significant gap in almost 6 years of continuous development. Maybe it's hard to imagine, but also maintainers sometimes face severe issues in their life. Comments like this don't make it any better.

Posting this here because I think only .NET people use Nuke (https://nuke.build/) to manage their build.