Replies: 2 comments
-
|
I would love something like Act for Bitbucket too! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
I checked if it would be possible.
Challenges.Most cases will work out of the box if convert Conclusion.It will require dynamic importer otherwise it will run perfectly. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
I’ve got an organization that I personally want to use GitHub (which would make this project useful to my day-to-day), but the org is pretty adamant about staying with Bitbucket.
I’m wondering if you guys think the model of computation is suitable to accept Bitbucket-pipelines.yml file as an optional input, or perhaps a “run-for-pipelines” mode. I know that Bitbuckets’ pipelines has its own containers it can plug-in which may or may not clash with concepts already supported by GitHub actions…
I’m aware this functionality probably doesn’t exist, but if it’s a simple enough refactor to support it I’d be happy to help.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions