Join the discussion

Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.

  • Hacker News
  • This feels like it’s not built for massively parallelized CI steps
  • What's difficult about artifacts ?
  • In the systems I am familiar with one has to explicitly describe jobs artifacts via YAML files as dependencies, for the most cases it’s not needed as all I need is to pass files between jobs. I don’t want explicit syntax for that, just shared ~/artifacts directory
  • IN DSCI CI artifacts are easy, every job can create a file inside ~/artifacts directory and all subsequent will see it. If any job remove a file for ~/artifacts all the subsequent jobs won't see it.

    So artifacts works as a pipeline data buffer

    Very easy. No need for explicit links via YAML/whatever ...

  • The example contradicts itself in such a short blog post (the example creates and reads ~/artifacts.txt, the prose claims repeatedly artifacts are anything in ~/artifacts/).

    This is also an even worse design than path artifacts in Gitlab CI.

  • Oh. It’s just a typo. Why it’s worse ?
  • > The idea is that - Git server + YAMLess pipelines for CICD (...)

    The first thing I see in the introduction [0] is a YAML configuration. What is YAMLess supposed to mean? I assumed it was "no YAML".

    [0] https://deadsimpleci.sparrowhub.io/doc/introduction

  • Yep - tiny , simple structured YAML on the top ( only to list jobs technically) everything else is general purpose programming languages