> We're starting to have the conversation of "do we need to replace GitHub as our CI/CD pipeline?"

Did you have the conversation "do we need to move from $whatever CI/CD to GitHub Actions?" beforehand? What were the arguments in favour?

▲

Macha 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Not the same company but similar discussions here:

- It was believed that GitHub would be more reliable than our self hosted Gitlab CI runners. This has proven to be very false.

- It was believed it would be easier to write tooling. I’m not on the dev tooling team, so can’t confirm if they found it true or not, but from the outside I see a lot more “Github can’t do that” than I did “Gitlab can’t do it”

▲

Normal_gaussian 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Those are both hilarious to me. In my last FTE role we had the exact opposite beliefs - we wanted to leave GitLabs increases in pricing and move to annual sub, but the reliability of self-hosted runners and the flexibility (and clarity) of the CI system was fantastic.

▲

dataengineer56 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> Those are both hilarious to me.

Why is it hilarious to believe that the industry leader might be better at something than doing it yourself?

	▲	Normal_gaussian an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		The hilarious part is more the absurdity and cognitive disconnect experienced when reading about serious evaluations that went in a completely opposite direction to those directly participated in.
	▲	2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]

▲

beardedetim 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's a ~year old product that started on GH. So this is the first time this team has had to think through "okay, so this isn't as reliable as it was at $oldjob."