This message was deleted.

I'm also curious about GH actions at wider scale. I was recently doing a research and found out that the pipelines code cannot be reused in private repositories, I'm curious if this is still an issue.

We are at our current company. “The scale” is probably subjective, but we have ~1000 repositories with GHA workflows right now and aiming to have ~1200 by the end of year.

@Tomas Dabašinskas That's a lot imho. How do you handle pipelines code duplication? Do you have a one or multiple standards or every team is doing it by their own? Or are you using some repo templating (like cookiecutter & cruft)?

IMO, after a deep analysis, the biggest problem with GH Actions is that they are not fully designed to implement best practices at scale. Yeah, they offer starter workflows, actions, composite actions and callable workflows, but at the end, they are very brittle, and the process to update pipelines with new practices is painful, no matter if you have dependabot or not. It is fully top-down, requires refactors and manual updates. Alternative? I would say that there is no one at this moment.

What about CircleCI?

The concepts/problems in CircleCI are more or less the same than GH Actions with a different terminology.

Buddy.Works for pipelines is really nice alternative

Does buddy provide a way to reuse workflows for multiple teams and customize imported workflows by teams by themselves? 🙂

Yeah it does, it’s great for multi project workflows

@Sam Crudge could you point out the part of the docs that shows that? I checked and I had a different impression

Thanks, good to know, maybe I'll check it when I will be working with a client that allows to use SaaS 🙂 Still i'm a little bit not convinced to no-code approach.