Yep, definitely agree. I feel like there are a lot of areas that GitHub Actions needs improvements to catch up to other CI providers, really basic-seeming stuff like "allow failure" support and so on.
I use tmate[1] to get a shell on the worker when I need to debug things interactively. Also act[2] lets you run a decent approximation of your actions locally. Still agree that it should be easier and not require third-party tools/actions, though.
I spent a few months at a consulting company working with a precision agriculture startup, and my mind was totally blown when I first learned how much technology goes into agriculture these days. I feel like a lot of tech people have a mental image of outdoor farming still being somewhat primitive (I certainly did!) which could cause the misconceptions mentioned in the article.
I'll also plug a little tool I wrote to supplement asciinema: asciiscript [1].
Basically if you get tired of watching yourself fix typos in your recordings, you can script stuff ahead of time and then record it automatically with asciinema. Although I don't think it works with programs that take input, like a REPL unfortunately.
I'd say that it should rather be a part of the type system.
Some kind of `obj isa Promise` should be the way to do this, not random property checks. But that's JS...
e: terraform is back!