act

Wow, that's very ambitious trying to replicate GHA and it's extra ambitious trying to extend act to be an actual runner, not just an emulator. I hope their act fork improves (the collective) act, although I do wish they had renamed theirs since it makes discussing act hard now that there are two of them For those curious: https://gitea.com/gitea/act/compare/nektos/master...main (although, as one might expect, upstream act is on https://github.com/nektos/act/commit/4989f444f1085ac0ec6b9bc... but their branch is only on https://gitea.com/gitea/act/commit/7754ba7fcf3f80b76bb4d7cf1... from 3 weeks ago)

I've been using act[1] as a tool to develop/test actions locally, which has helped a lot for creating new actions and debugging existing ones without incurring additional build costs. There does appear to be some solutions on the marketplace that will allow you to ssh into a runner, but I haven't had a need for them as of yet. [1] https://github.com/nektos/act

Yeah, 60GB (“big”) and there is a “large” act’s Docker image whose size is 16GB: https://github.com/nektos/act/issues/107#issuecomment-760376...

Mmh, I wonder what integrating act[1] into a CI System would look like... you could easily migrate your github projects to self-hosted and still support something like woodpecker ci. [1]: https://github.com/nektos/act

This is something I’d love to try on my personal projects. I recently used act[0] to locally test my GitHub actions pipelines and worked okay, the fact that I could interact with the Dagger API via a Python SDK could be even more convenient, will definitely try! [0]: https://github.com/nektos/act

Alternatively https://docs.dagger.io/1200/local-dev/ https://docs.drone.io/cli/drone-exec/ https://github.com/nektos/act

If you want to run github actions locally before any pitfalls, you can try out https://github.com/nektos/act

Depending on one's definition of "good," running GL locally in docker is (in my experience) painless, given sufficient disk space and probably RAM But yes, your observation is my whole complaint: it is not _reasonable_ to ask a GLCI developer to run a local copy of GL, complete with any shared GLCI template repos, in a local docker container just to have local execution. Maybe I wouldn't complain about it so much had I not started with circleci so long ago and had such a "wow, this is amazing" followed by gitlab-runner's :troll_face: -- to say nothing of GitHub Actions just straight up ignoring that whole demographic and hoping https://github.com/nektos/act emulates enough to have people not notice the massive feature gap

This reminds me of a brief discussion/feature-request on the nektos/act GitHub repository (a project that allows developers to run GitHub Actions workflows locally): https://github.com/nektos/act/issues/235

For now you can just host GitHub Actions locally. https://github.com/nektos/act

Not that it's in any way official, however you can run Github Actions locally with https://github.com/nektos/act

> Just one problem with this: I’ve never used GitHub actions before. So I had to figure that out, along with setting up proper S3 credentials and getting my site to build. ... > What does mise in place tell me? Separate the tasks. Find a way to prep just the action file, then just the credentials, then the idiosyncrasies of my projects. After that I can integrate the pipeline with the documentation proper. The problem I find is that unless you've done something very similar before (and recently, because services and APIs are always in flux), what can happen is you complete a few tasks, then on a later task you find some gotcha that means your original approach isn't going to work, so you come up with a workaround which requires you to redo/change the earlier tasks. Development whack-a-mole. So what I tend to do is take the riskiest tas

> Setting up GHA is still a lot of "commit and hope for the best". I've resorted to having a sandbox repo just for experimentation/testing so that I don't overly pollute repos that I actually care about. It would be great to get more instrumentation to see what is going on. There is act[0] which aims to let you run github actions locally via Docker. It isn't perfect but it does a decent job at it, and for the most part your pipeline can be run locally. After MS bought GH, I had hopes that they would build a tool to run action locally, but nothing yet. [0] https://github.com/nektos/act

You can run github actions offline https://github.com/nektos/act I don't think github is trying to create lock-in, I think rather they were trying to make a way to easily share actions (not sure what other CIs systems are designed to have an ecosystem of publicly shared actions). The actions are public and therefore easy to make something that interprets them. I can only guess at some point there will be a push for CIs to converge on some "actions" standard, maybe?