What’s so much better about it? I use both and I don’t see significant differences, but I’m happy to be enlightened.

treyd 27 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

It has a wider feature set and is just generally easier to use. When I had to set up GHA I was constantly surprised with how hard some very basic things were that were trivial with GitLab CI.

GHA was based on Azure Actions, which was never intended as a CI system nor meant to be used in a context where actions could be malicious. So it's the wrong tool for the job that had to be adapted to fit another use case, straying from its original design principles to make it work.

	▲	otterley 24 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Thanks for responding, but unfortunately it’s still too vague to agree or disagree with.

▲

esseph an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Parent child pipelines

Shared pipelines across multiple projects

rules: have far more flexibility than githubs if:

GitLab is very easy to fan out CI/CD runners on your own k8s infra.

	▲	otterley 39 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Doesn’t “needs:” handle the parent-child case? Shared pipelines also exist: https://docs.github.com/en/organizations/managing-organizati... and https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-cloud@latest/repositor... Hosting runners on K8S is similarly easy; GitHub even built a controller to help: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/concepts/runners/actions-...
	▲	41 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]