Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Developers' Perception of GitHub Actions: A Survey Analysis

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2303.04084 v1 pith:SYPAXNPJ submitted 2023-03-07 cs.SE

classification cs.SE
keywords actionsdevelopersautomationgithubactionrepositorieswhenconducted
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

GitHub introduced "Actions" in 2019 to increase workflow velocity and add customized automation to the repositories. Any individual can develop Actions for automating workflow on GitHub repositories and others can reuse them whenever open source. GitHub introduced its marketplace for commercializing and sharing these automation tools, which currently hosts 16,730 Actions. Yet, there are numerous Actions that are developed and distributed in local repositories and outside the Marketplace. So far, the research community conducted mining studies to understand Actions with a significant focus on CI/CD. We conducted a survey study with 90 Action developers and users to understand the motivations and best practices in using, developing, and debugging Actions, and the challenges associated with these tasks. We found that developers prefer Actions with verified creators and more stars when choosing between similar Actions, and often switch to an alternative Action when facing bugs or a lack of documentation. 60.87% of the developers consider the composition of YAML files, which are essential for Action integration, challenging and error-prone. They mainly check Q\&A forums to fix issues with these YAML files. Finally, developers tend to avoid using Actions (and hence automation) to reduce complexity, and security risk, or when the benefits of Actions are not worth the cost/effort of setting up Actions for automation.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Extension Decisions in Open Source Software Ecosystem

    cs.SE 2025-07 reject novelty 6.0 of 10

    A GitHub Actions graph study reports that most new CI tools duplicate existing functionality and that a handful of early tools become the templates for later copies, although the supporting calculation is missing from...

Pith tools