TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Ask HN: Should we build support for more CI platforms, or features for Actions?

4 点作者 igorzij大约 1 年前
Currently, Github Actions is de-facto the only fully supported CI platform in Digger, we’ve been building it as a CI-agnostic tool (https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;diggerhq&#x2F;digger) from get go. We keep getting requests to support more CI systems on our community slack and over Github issues (https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;diggerhq&#x2F;digger&#x2F;issues&#x2F;81).<p>Unlike other automation tools for Terraform, Digger doesn’t run jobs on the server; instead it uses your CI (like Actions) as a compute backend. This is more secure and also much cheaper if you use your own runners in your CI.<p>But each CI and each VCS is ever so slightly different; and we are now at a crossroads - Should we build support for more CI platforms, or more features for GitHub Actions? We’d love any thoughts&#x2F;inputs!

2 条评论

codingdave大约 1 年前
&gt; &quot;We keep getting requests to...&quot;<p>If you are getting consistent feedback from your customer base that they desire a feature, why would you second-guess that feedback by asking a different group of people if they agree?
评论 #39918505 未加载
brudgers大约 1 年前
<i>We keep getting requests to support more CI systems on our community slack and over Github issues</i><p>Give people a price for the feature they request. The price should reflect the costs of future support. And of course overhead and profit.<p>Good luck.
评论 #39918946 未加载