今日已更新 264 条资讯 | 累计 23847 条内容
关于我们

标签：#Git

找到 1231 篇相关文章

开发者

Stop Running `terraform apply` From Your Laptop: Building Your First Terraform CI/CD Pipeline with GitHub Actions

One of the biggest mistakes beginners make when learning Terraform is treating their local machine as the deployment server. A typical workflow looks like this: terraform init terraform plan terraform apply While this approach is perfectly fine for learning, it quickly becomes problematic when working on real-world projects with multiple engineers. Consider these questions: Who deployed the infrastructure? Was the infrastructure reviewed before deployment? Can someone else reproduce the deployment? What happens if the engineer's laptop is lost or misconfigured? How do we know exactly what changed? These are some of the reasons Infrastructure as Code (IaC) is almost always integrated with Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) pipelines in professional environments. In this article, we'll build a simple Terraform CI/CD pipeline using GitHub Actions. Instead of focusing only on the YAML syntax, we'll first understand why each stage exists and how they work together to produce safe, repeatable infrastructure deployments. What is Terraform CI/CD? Terraform CI/CD is the process of automating the validation, planning, and deployment of infrastructure whenever changes are made to Terraform code. Instead of running Terraform commands manually from a developer's laptop, a CI/CD platform executes those commands automatically in a controlled environment. The workflow typically looks like this: Developer │ ▼ Git Push │ ▼ GitHub Repository │ ▼ GitHub Actions │ ▼ Terraform Init │ ▼ Terraform Validate │ ▼ Terraform Plan │ ▼ Manual Approval │ ▼ Terraform Apply │ ▼ AWS Infrastructure This approach provides consistency, visibility, and security while reducing the chances of human error. Why Not Run Terraform Manually? Running Terraform from your laptop works well for personal projects, but it introduces several risks in a team environment. Manual Deployment CI/CD Deployment Requires someone to remember every command Runs automatically Easy to skip validation Validat

2026-07-23 原文 →
AI 资讯

GitLab CI "Cannot connect to unix:///var/run/docker.sock"

The fast fix If your GitLab CI job fails with Cannot connect to the Docker daemon at unix:///var/run/docker.sock , your docker client is looking for a local socket that does not exist inside the job container, because DOCKER_HOST is not set. Point the client at the docker:dind service over TCP and the error goes away: build : image : docker:28.3 services : - name : docker:28.3-dind alias : docker variables : DOCKER_HOST : tcp://docker:2376 DOCKER_TLS_CERTDIR : " /certs" DOCKER_CERT_PATH : " /certs/client" DOCKER_TLS_VERIFY : " 1" script : - docker info - docker build -t my-app . That is the whole fix for the common case. The rest of this page explains why the socket variant of the error is different from the tcp://docker:2375 variant, and covers the two other setups (socket-mounted runners and the Kubernetes executor) where the same message shows up for a different reason. Why you get the unix socket variant specifically This error is not the same as Cannot connect to the Docker daemon at tcp://docker:2375 . The address in the message tells you exactly what the client tried: Cannot connect to the Docker daemon at unix:///var/run/docker.sock. Is the docker daemon running? When DOCKER_HOST is empty, the Docker CLI falls back to its compiled-in default, the local unix socket at /var/run/docker.sock . Inside a GitLab CI job that uses the docker executor, that socket file simply is not there. The daemon runs in a separate docker:dind service container, not in your job container, so there is nothing listening on the local socket. The client connects, finds no socket, and prints the message above. The tcp://docker:2375 form is the opposite problem: DOCKER_HOST is set correctly but the dind service is not reachable (missing service, no privileged mode, or a TLS mismatch). If you are seeing that address instead, read the companion write-up on the tcp://docker:2375 form of this error , which walks the service and privileged-mode causes in detail. This page is about the case w

2026-07-23 原文 →
AI 资讯

MergeForge: Resolve Git Conflicts in VS Code or Cursor Like in JetBrains

Tired of squinting at VS Code’s stacked merge editor? MergeForge brings a JetBrains-style three-pane conflict resolver to VS Code and Cursor — and pairs it with an AI assistant that actually reads your repository before it suggests a fix. The problem We’ve all been there. You’re halfway through a rebase. Git stops. Twelve files are conflicted. You open one in VS Code… and get that familiar stacked layout: Incoming, Current, and a result pane that somehow still feels like a puzzle with half the pieces missing. If you ever used WebStorm or IntelliJ, you know how good merge tools can feel: Your side on the left Their side on the right The result in the middle Gutter arrows that just… work In VS Code land, that flow never quite arrived. You click Accept Current, Accept Incoming, Accept Both, and hope nothing important got flattened. Word-level diffs? Authorship? A clear “who wrote this chunk?” signal? Often missing when you need them most. And when AI entered the chat, a lot of tools treated conflicts like isolated text blobs: “Here are the <<<<<<< markers. Good luck.” But real merges need context. What was the branch trying to do? What does the surrounding file look like? Who touched this last? Without that, “AI resolve” is just confident guessing. I wanted the JetBrains merge experience — inside VS Code and Cursor — with an assistant that behaves more like a careful teammate than a slot machine. So I built it. The solution: MergeForge MergeForge is an open-source VS Code / Cursor extension that turns conflicted files into a proper three-pane visual merge. Layout: Left Center Right Yours (local) Result (editable, seeded from the merge base) Theirs (incoming) Panes scroll together. Chunks connect with bands. Gutter controls let you accept, ignore, or blend sides without fighting the UI. When you’re done, Apply writes the result and stages it with git. If you prefer Cursor, you’re covered too. The editor works the same; for AI features you plug in your own provider key (

2026-07-23 原文 →
AI 资讯

I Built urldn-link-check — A GitHub Action to Catch Broken Links Before They Reach Production

Documentation is often the last thing developers think about—until a broken link frustrates users or a README sends someone to a 404 page. I wanted a simple way to automatically verify links in Markdown documentation during CI, so I built urldn-link-check. It's an open-source GitHub Action and CLI that scans your documentation and reports issues before they're merged. Features ✅ Detect broken links (404/500) ↪️ Detect redirect chains 🔒 Detect insecure HTTP links 📏 Find overly long URLs 📄 Scan Markdown & MDX files ⚡ Fast concurrent scanning 💬 GitHub PR summaries 📊 JSON & Markdown reports Installation npm install -D urldn-link-check or npx urldn-link-check . GitHub Action uses: urldn/link-check@v1 That's it. Every push or pull request can automatically verify your documentation. Why I Built It While maintaining documentation, I noticed that broken links often go unnoticed until someone reports them. Instead of checking them manually, I wanted a lightweight tool that integrates directly into GitHub Actions and fits naturally into a CI workflow. Open Source The project is MIT licensed and contributions are welcome. ⭐ GitHub: https://github.com/urldn/link-check 📦 npm: https://www.npmjs.com/package/urldn-link-check https://www.npmjs.com/package/urldn-link-check This is the first developer tool in the URLDN ecosystem, with more open-source projects planned in the future. If you have ideas or feedback, I'd love to hear them.

2026-07-23 原文 →
AI 资讯

The Cheap Way to Add AI Review to CI: Small Local Models Plus Prompt Caching

I wired an AI code reviewer into CI, felt clever, and then looked at the bill after a busy week of PRs. Every push, every commit, sending full diffs to a big frontier model. It added up faster than I expected, and most of what it was reviewing was formatting changes and README edits that did not need a genius reading them. So I rebuilt it as two tiers, and the cost dropped hard without losing the catches that mattered. The idea is simple. Do not send everything to the expensive model. Use a cheap model as a bouncer that decides what is even worth escalating, and reserve the big model (with caching turned on) for the files that could actually hurt you. Tier one: a cheap triage pass The first tier looks at the diff and answers one question: is anything here risky enough to justify a real review? That is a classification task, and classification does not need a frontier model. I run this tier on a small local model. On my own machine that is Ollama with qwen2.5-coder, but in CI it can be a self-hosted small model or the cheapest cloud tier your provider offers. The job is triage, not judgment. The triage prompt is deliberately narrow. I do not ask it to review. I ask it to route: You are a triage filter for code review. For the diff below, output JSON only: { "risk": "low" | "high", "reason": " <one short phrase > " } Mark "high" if the diff touches: auth, access control, money/token math, cryptography, SQL or shell string building, deserialization, file paths, network calls, or anything that changes who can do what. Mark "low" for formatting, comments, docs, tests, renames, and config bumps. DIFF: <diff here > A small model is perfectly good at "does this touch auth or money." When it says low, CI posts a one-line "no high-risk changes detected" and stops. No expensive call. In practice that shortcuts the majority of PRs, because most PRs really are docs, tests, and plumbing. Tier two: the big model, but only on the risky files, with caching When tier one says high, t

2026-07-22 原文 →
AI 资讯

Unlocking Digital Identities with Open-Source SSI SDK

why-we-open-sour-c1f013bf.webp alt: Building Digital Identity Tools - Why We Open-Sourced Our SSI SDK relative: false Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI) is a framework that allows individuals and organizations to control their own digital identities and share verified credentials without relying on a central authority. This paradigm shift empowers users with greater privacy and control over their personal data, while also providing robust mechanisms for verifying the authenticity of credentials. What is Self-Sovereign Identity (SSI)? SSI is built around the concept of decentralized identifiers (DIDs) and verifiable credentials. DIDs are unique identifiers that are controlled by the entity they represent, enabling them to manage their own identity data. Verifiable credentials are digital assertions that can be issued by one party and verified by another, ensuring the authenticity and integrity of the information shared. Why did we open-source the SSI SDK? Open-sourcing the SSI SDK was a strategic decision driven by several factors. First, fostering innovation within the community is crucial for advancing the field of digital identity. By making our SDK available to everyone, we encourage collaboration and experimentation, leading to new ideas and improvements. Second, promoting transparency is essential for building trust in digital identity systems. Open-source projects allow others to inspect the codebase, understand how it works, and identify potential vulnerabilities. This transparency helps build confidence in the security and reliability of the SDK. Finally, enabling a broader community to contribute to and benefit from secure digital identity solutions aligns with our mission to democratize access to these technologies. By lowering the barriers to entry, we hope to empower more developers and organizations to adopt and improve upon our work. What are the key features of the SSI SDK? The SSI SDK provides a comprehensive set of tools for building digital identity app

2026-07-22 原文 →
← 上一页 下一页 →