[HN Gopher] Supercharging GitHub Actions with Job Summaries
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Supercharging GitHub Actions with Job Summaries
        
       Author : judge2020
       Score  : 53 points
       Date   : 2022-05-16 18:28 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.blog)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.blog)
        
       | bin_bash wrote:
       | Very clever to use markdown for this: makes it easy to implement
       | on both sides. I would've probably done some kind of custom table
       | DSL which would've been way worse.
        
       | junon wrote:
       | "Supercharging" is such an exhausting buzzword these days...
        
         | mirntyfirty wrote:
         | I feel similarly about "powered by."
        
       | simonw wrote:
       | I love the design of this!                   echo '### Hello
       | world! :rocket:' >> $GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY
       | 
       | Having this as an environment variable you can write to that is
       | really clever, and makes it easy to generate these from other
       | scripts (or Python commands etc) too.
        
       | unboxingelf wrote:
       | Nit: love the usage of emojis for quickly conveying information,
       | but do use them consistently. In this example they're using both
       | a 'red x' and a 'red dot' for failures. Similarly, they use both
       | tenses "Failed" and "Fail", "Passed" and "Pass". Pick one and
       | stick with it.
        
         | bilalq wrote:
         | This is definitely a nice feature. I had previously tried
         | creating workflow jobs that had emojis in their name, but that
         | wasn't supported.
        
       | encryptluks2 wrote:
       | I can't help but feel like GitHub is like 5 years behind GitLab.
        
         | dmart wrote:
         | On the whole I think the GitHub Actions experience is really
         | nice, but there are some baffling decisions for sure, like
         | requiring GitHub Enterprise just to put a manual approval step
         | in a workflow.
        
           | noahtallen wrote:
           | I'm not sure that last part is true. I definitely use a
           | workflow on an OSS repo that includes a manual approval step.
           | (A team has to approve it before the rest of the workflow
           | completes)
        
             | judge2020 wrote:
             | > Environments, environment protection rules, and
             | environment secrets are available in *public* repositories
             | for all products. For access to environments in *private*
             | repositories, you must use GitHub Enterprise.
             | 
             | https://docs.github.com/en/actions/managing-workflow-
             | runs/re...
        
         | hatware wrote:
         | They also put generic DRY features like 'internal' repos behind
         | their most expensive paywall. Thanks M$.
        
           | dymk wrote:
           | Do you feel you're entitled to those features for free? You
           | can always run your own GitLab.
        
           | aeyes wrote:
           | Looking at the pricing page I see "unlimited public/private
           | repositories" in their free "plan".
           | 
           | Could you explain what type of internal repos you are talking
           | about?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-05-16 23:00 UTC)