What does HackerNews think of gitlab-ci-local?

GitHub Actions could be so much better | Sep 2023

yeah... https://github.com/firecow/gitlab-ci-local is a good workaround but should be built-in. How do developers at GitLab/Github debug their workflows?

Ask HN: How can we make the current CI/CD ecosystem better? | Dec 2022

I've been thinking lately that how I could do some integration testing FOR my CI-pipelines. My client has very complex pipelines which has business logic inside them and every week we run into new bugs and regressions. I can't think any easy way to write tests for them to make it harder to break when developing new features.

Btw. Gitlab allows splitting your pipelines to multiple files using include[1]. Also we have used gitlab-ci-local[2] to run our pipelines locally when developing them.

1: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/yaml/includes.html 2: https://github.com/firecow/gitlab-ci-local

GitHub Actions Pitfalls | Sep 2022

Expand Context ↕

Then maybe this?

https://github.com/firecow/gitlab-ci-local

(I only tried it shortly many months ago before running into some issues, it probably works better now)

The End of CI | Jul 2022

Expand Context ↕

> One thing that would be nice, however, would be the ability to run the entire pipeline locally.

This cost me many hours of waiting for the Gitlab CI runner when debugging non-trivial pipelines, when the issue was something that did not have to do with the script steps inside of the jobs but rather how the Gitlab runner handled things.

I've found gitlab-ci-local [1] which actually does run the Gitlab pipeline locally, although I had to write some boilerplaye scripts to set up all the necessary 'CI_FOO_SOMETHING' environment variables before running the tool. (Which sometimes came back to bite me because the issue was actually in the content of some of those environment variables). It's still a very good tool.

[1] https://github.com/firecow/gitlab-ci-local