GitHub Actions Reviews

I'm using GitHub Actions for our CI/CD pipeline, and we're using it to build our code, test it, and publish it for the Azure or AWS environments.

GitHub Actions has positively impacted our organization by improving collaboration between our teams, reducing downtime, and decreasing the time we spend on deployments. We can run our own pipelines with caches included and there are runners available. We can see metrics, including performance metrics and average time, showing how much time it takes for the job to complete. These insights and metrics have significantly improved our productivity.

GitHub Actions gives us a 22% time saving to fix issues more quickly, allowing us to speed up the deployment process and identify the areas where we are spending more time in our build pipelines. This enabled us to reduce the percentage of time taken for deployment and address those bottlenecks.

I appreciate that GitHub Actions provides environments and secrets management.

We can have a separate pipeline for a separate environment and configure those settings. We can also configure the secrets and variables for separate environments, which is a useful way to run those pipelines and pass the secrets without exposing them on the pipelines. From a workflow perspective, we can see the logs and inspect the build stages, which provides helpful visibility.

We were able to use reusable workflows across our organization with GitHub Actions, allowing us to segregate the workflows based on our needs and run only the necessary steps while passing information between them.

GitHub Actions features allow us to customize the runners, which I appreciate very much.

The AI capabilities of GitHub Actions are satisfactory as long as it has up-to-date AI details. The governance provides transparency with auditing, so we can see what's happening. It includes data encryption, which we are satisfied with, and we can customize security features as well.

The accuracy of GitHub Actions is 100% accurate, which is fine and works well.

I don't see major issues with GitHub Actions. We could benefit from a template-based approach. A pain point is the need to manually refresh the pages for the actions, so having those minor changes would be helpful.

For improvements, I would suggest that a more user-friendly interface and updated documentation would be helpful, though currently we are satisfied with the documentation.

I have been using GitHub Actions for almost six years.

GitHub Actions is stable.

Scalability is fine with GitHub Actions. We can run our own workloads, and if needed, we can scale accordingly.

I am satisfied with the customer support of GitHub Actions. They are up to date and provide the exact solutions that we need. I would rate the customer support as a nine.

We haven't used a solution other than GitHub Actions because we decided to go with GitHub.

We didn't evaluate other options before choosing GitHub Actions. We simply went with it.

I would rate GitHub Actions as an eight. I chose an eight because it has all the options I need to create pipelines, and it is a customizable and handy tool.

GitHub Actions is deployed mostly on public cloud in my organization, but sometimes in a private cloud as well. We're mostly using Azure, AWS, Oracle, and GCP for our public cloud deployment.

My advice for others looking to use GitHub Actions is that you can start without any cost, and as your organization scales, you can choose multiple plans and begin using it.

The main use case for GitHub Actions is maintaining enterprise repositories in private for security reasons, because we have multiple enterprise clients. We're using the premium GitHub service for storing our repos. This is the primary use case, and we've executed GitHub Actions very conservatively.

GitHub Actions provides workflows that allow for process automation, enabling operations such as build, deploy, and scale applications. These workflows help organizations modify processes according to their needs, making it a powerful tool for process automation. The product's ability to allow codeless operations via workflows is valuable as it reduces the risk associated with manual coding, such as errors in YAML files.

While GitHub Actions offers a range of functionalities, it is newer compared to more established tools such as Jenkins and Azure DevOps. There is still room for improvement, especially in areas concerning deeper capabilities akin to those provided by Jenkins and Azure DevOps.

Given the evolving nature of technology, there are potential improvements GitHub Actions can focus on, including enhancing support and reliability to match its competitors.

For the last eight years, I have continuously been using Jenkins CI/CD. For the last six years, I also got the opportunity to work with Azure DevOps, which has become a favorite for CI/CD prospects.

GitHub is scalable and reliable as it's a well-established and popular product for version controlling.

GitHub, being part of Microsoft, benefits from the extensive support and management improvements, providing enterprise-level support and scalability.

The support received is top-notch, as GitHub is now managed by Microsoft. Previously under a different organization, it now benefits from Microsoft's well-established enterprise support structure.

Positive

If you're looking for open-source tools, Jenkins is recommended, offering robust CI/CD processes. For enterprise clients, Azure DevOps is also highly recommended, owing to its comprehensive support from Microsoft.

GitHub Actions is seen as good, but direct experience has been limited, so more time to explore would be beneficial.

Log visualization definitely aids troubleshooting within GitHub Actions.

YAML processes are straightforward but can be error-prone; GitHub Actions workflows offer a more reliable alternative. However, experience with them should be deepened, especially to discover potential best parts or good sides.

Ranking GitHub nine for version controlling, configuration, and integration, and GitHub Actions an eight, reflects my perceived benefits of these tools, albeit based more on my understanding than direct implementation.

I would rate this product an eight overall.

I am using GitHub Actions for continuous integration and continuous deployment, specifically deploying to Kubernetes using Helm charts.

GitHub Actions has simplified our workflow by eliminating the need for a separate code repository. It allows automatic triggers for various tasks once code is checked in.

GitHub Actions is a beautiful tool that integrates smoothly with all major tools, reducing CI/CD work by 30% to 40%. Its seamless integration with a tested and proven source code repository like GitHub is one of the most valuable features. Workflow-based actions, the ability to run jobs in parallel, and integration with multiple tools without worrying about plugins are also key benefits.

Sometimes incremental steps should be taken during deployment instead of trying to execute all tasks simultaneously, particularly when dealing with AWS EKS clusters and Helm charts.

I have been using GitHub Actions for over four years.

GitHub Actions is stable and reliable, saving considerable time.

I have not needed to contact their support since many issues can be solved through a simple Google search and existing documentation.

Positive

Previously, I used Jenkins for CI/CD. I switched because GitHub Actions integrate seamlessly with GitHub and reduce the overhead of managing separate repositories and servers.

Proper planning for migration from other CI/CD tools is necessary, including setting up the runners and workflows.

For those migrating from other CI/CD tools, proper planning and understanding of Actions, runner setup, and workflow configuration are essential.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Positive

We use GitHub Actions for machine learning and predictive analytic use cases, but not in generative AI, as we use it a lot in MLOps, for example, for the purpose of model packaging and automating model deployment. We use CI/CD from GitHub Actions as well.

GitHub Actions helps a lot with integration and also with automation, which eases our development processes.

It saves a lot of time with GitHub Actions; especially, the whole process if done manually might cost us a lot, maybe a week or two weeks just for deployment, but now with automation, we automate the deployment effectively.

The main saving with GitHub Actions is that we do not have to put our senior engineer for deployment.

GitHub Actions is cost-effective, especially when we consider doing it manually with an engineer, as that is very costly to us.

GitHub Actions' primary use case is CI/CD, and we use it for infrastructure as code. In one of our projects, we use Terraform to define the infrastructure, and we use CI/CD to make architectural changes to the enterprise infrastructure, and it works effectively.

The most helpful part of GitHub Actions is the automation; one is automation of infrastructure, and the other thing is that because we work a lot with data engineering, we do a lot of custom Python packaging. GitHub Actions has been very useful for that; for example, we can make code changes, and then the library is automatically built and published to the PyPI index.

Frankly, I cannot imagine something that could be improved in GitHub Actions; there's a lot of capabilities, and the feature set is more advanced than we use.

The pricing is high for the advanced security; GitHub Advanced Security for us is quite pricey.

I have been working with GitHub Actions for quite a long time, maybe three to four years at least, especially on some recent enterprise projects.

GitHub Actions is not difficult to initially set up and deploy. The UI is very intuitive, and we've set it up for many use cases. The GitHub Actions build agent setup for on-prem deployment was quite smooth and easy to set up.

We can set up a new project and the actions in just hours.

GitHub Actions is scalable; we have no issues, and currently, I'm using it in a Telco setup, so for our Telco company, it is useful, and it scales effectively.

We haven't needed much regarding GitHub Actions support. Recently since we started using AI Chat GPT for GitHub Actions, it has made our development much easier.

I don't require technical support from GitHub directly as I can handle it myself.

Positive

The syntax for the action itself requires a bit of learning; the syntax and the language being used for composing the GitHub Actions is the only challenging aspect.

On a scale of 1-10, I rate GitHub Actions a 9 out of 10.

I use GitHub Actions for CI/CD pipelines. I automate infrastructure, deployment, and all processes. Most companies use CI/CD pipelines, and GitHub Actions is one of the tools available for this purpose.

The most valuable feature of GitHub Actions is that it is completely free. It can be integrated with different environments and cloud providers, supporting all major cloud providers. 

Additionally, it improves efficiency as it involves no downtime and is managed by GitHub.

The main improvement would be to add support for more programming languages and frameworks. Currently, only six to seven languages are supported, so increasing this would be beneficial.

I have been using GitHub Actions for almost five years, working as a consultant.

I find GitHub Actions to be really stable as it is entirely managed by GitHub. I would rate its stability ten out of ten.

I rate scalability as ten out of ten because it has no downtime and is fully managed by AWS.

I have not interacted with technical support for GitHub Actions. It might be because the free version does not typically offer technical support. There is a paid version available for business enterprises.

Positive

Many of my customers have switched from Jenkins, Bitbucket, and AWS to GitHub Actions because it is easy to set up and it's free.

The initial setup can be slightly challenging at times, especially for complex use cases. You need basic knowledge of YAML scripting to set up GitHub Actions. However, following official documentation for a simple setup is really easy.

GitHub Actions is completely free for most customers, which is a significant factor for adoption.

I usually convert customers from Jenkins, Bitbucket, and AWS to GitHub Actions.

Overall, I rate GitHub Actions ten out of ten. 

For new users, I advise understanding your requirements thoroughly and using GitHub Actions accordingly. Keep in mind that there's a limited number of CI/CD pipeline hours available in the free edition monthly.

Our primary use case for GitHub Actions involves building and deploying applications. We also use it for building and designing GitHub Actions to manage application resources and infrastructure.

GitHub Actions has been a foundational element, integrating well into our ecosystem and allowing for a streamlined process when working within GitHub.

The most valuable features of GitHub Actions for our work are its scalability and the array of features it offers. It is easy to use, especially if you are accustomed to using GitHub.

Switching between hosted and self-hosted agents can be a bit complex, as self-hosted agents need to be provisioned in platforms like Azure or AWS. This process could be simplified.

I have been working with GitHub Actions for more than a year.

I have not encountered stability issues with GitHub Actions, and I would rate its stability as a nine out of ten.

I find GitHub Actions to be highly scalable. It deserves a ten out of ten for scalability.

For someone familiar with similar tools, the setup is relatively easy, perhaps around eight or nine out of ten. However, for a beginner, it might not be as straightforward.

The cost for GitHub Actions may be around $45 dollars per user. The pricing seems acceptable for our company.

I recommend using GitHub Actions as it is a solid choice for automating workflows. If you are considering alternatives, you might look into Azure Pipelines, but GitHub Actions is a strong contender. 

I rate the overall solution as eight out of ten.

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 mainly use GitHub Actions for our CI/CD process. Whenever there's a change in our source code, we integrate and configure it using GitHub Actions to ensure code quality before merging it into our main branch.

I find the automation feature of GitHub Actions most valuable for our building processes. It integrates seamlessly with GitHub, so there's no extra configuration needed, making the building process easy and efficient. GitHub Actions handles scalability well, automatically managing execution infrastructure without requiring additional configurations. We haven't yet explored GitHub Actions' support for AI projects, as we haven't used its AI capabilities.

In terms of improvements, I think better logging for debugging purposes would be helpful, especially for complex workflows. 

I have been working with GitHub Actions for the past year.

I would rate the stability of GitHub Actions at eight.

Scalability for GitHub Actions is a ten out of ten because it handles everything seamlessly. Unlike other solutions where you have to configure nodes and machines, GitHub Actions dynamically provision runners, making them highly scalable without any extra effort or static configurations. One can focus on one's work, and GitHub Actions takes care of the rest by allocating necessary resources.

Around five thousand users in our company work with GitHub Actions, including IT specialists, developers, and engineers.

The support team provides ample support.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. I would rate the setup of GitHub Actions an eight out of ten. We use it in a cloud environment.  

Regarding cost, as an enterprise, we negotiate our license and expenses, so I can't provide a specific rating for that.

Due to its ease of integration, GitHub Actions is highly recommended. But I believe that there are some areas, like debugging and cost for more prolonged executions, that need improvement.

I would rate GitHub Actions an eight out of ten.