HACKER Q&A
📣 rmunn

What CI do you use instead of GitHub Actions?


With GitHub's recent instability, I'm seriously looking into alternatives. But the one piece of the puzzle I haven't figured out yet is GitHub Actions. I've used both TeamCity and Jenkins in the past, and have no desire to go back to either one; GHA, for all its flaws, was just so much better of an experience than TeamCity or Jenkins, for me at least. I've read about multiple alternatives to GHA for CI, but it's hard for me to tell just from the documentation what they feel like to use.

So, for those of you who have used left GitHub Actions and are using a different CI solution, I'd like to ask: what did you settle on? Why? Are you happy with it? And how does it feel to use it? Do you feel like it's invisible and gets out of the way, or do you feel like you're constantly having to massage its configuration all the time?

  👤 zenoware Accepted Answer ✓
Still love CircleCI. They're one of the most mature in the space. Not as flashy as GHA but gets the job done.
👤 ipnon
Why do you need a CI at all? You can use a queue like Oban on your own server to kick off jobs. And with AI you can add new jobs, so long as they are well defined, in a few minutes and schedule them however you like. I only recommend this because I use a similar system. If you are planning on GitHub's recent instability to be improved in the future, I would not get your hopes up, they have a long history of instability.
👤 elguyosupremo
We use GCP Cloud Build for most of our CI needs, and then Argo and Kargo to deploy things.

Cloud Build is generally pretty straight forward to use and we rarely have to mess with pipelines after initial setup. It's easy to make new images with any tools you need for your build process.

Triggers and repo connections are a little annoying to setup, but if you get a little terraform module set up it's not too bad.

👤 ale_jacques
Gitlab CI with some remote runners on a VPS that I already have (so I can keep myself on the free tier). Works perfectly.