CI/CD Architecture

Framework-agnostic CI/CD principles. The body presents trade-offs and common defaults; concrete pipelines live in RECIPES.md (GitHub Actions). See STACK.md for pinned action/tool versions used in the recipes.

This skill is suggestion-mode: most CI/CD decisions depend on team size, deployment target, risk tolerance, and existing infra. Each section names the choice, the trade-off, and a common default — not a mandate. Override locally with an ADR when a decision diverges from the suggestion.

Image-level rules (Dockerfile, multi-arch, scanning) live in docker-architect; this skill covers only the workflow shape around them.

1. Pipeline taxonomy

Most projects need four pipeline shapes. Keeping them in separate workflow files is the common default — it makes "what triggers what" obvious and lets each evolve independently.

• CI — runs on every push and PR. Lint, type-check, test, build. Fast feedback (target under ~10 min).
• Release — runs on tag or main-branch merge. Produces versioned artifacts (binaries, images, packages). Must be idempotent.
• Deploy — promotes an existing artifact to an environment. Triggered manually or by release. Never rebuilds.
• Scheduled — periodic jobs: dependency scans, SBOM refresh, dead-link checks. Decoupled from the change cycle.

Trade-off: one mega-workflow is simpler at first but couples "what was built" to "where it ran" — rolling back gets harder. Splitting them lets you redeploy yesterday's image without re-running CI. Reach for the split once the project ships to more than one environment.

2. Trigger design

• `push` to main — CI + release. Path filters skip docs-only changes.
• `pull_request` — CI only. Required status checks live here.
• `workflow_dispatch` — deploys, ad-hoc reruns. Expose on every workflow you might ever need to retrigger manually.
• `schedule` — dependency / security scans. Use cron at non-peak times.
• Concurrency — every workflow should set a concurrency: group. For PRs, cancel-in-progress (don't waste CI on stale commits); for main/release, queue (don't race deploys).

GitHub Actions concurrency + path-filter examples in RECIPES.md §2.

3. Pipeline composition

DRY without overcomplicating. Three composition levels, in order of cost:

• Single workflow file — fine for small repos. Inline duplication is cheaper than abstraction here.
• Composite actions — share a single step block within a workflow. Reach for this when ≥3 jobs need the same setup steps.
• Reusable workflows (workflow_call) — share a multi-job pipeline across repos. Reach for this when ≥3 repos need the same shape.

Trade-off: premature abstraction makes the pipeline harder to read and debug. Factor out at the third copy, not the second. Reusable workflows in particular have non-trivial debugging overhead — stay inline until the duplication is clearly painful.

4. Supply-chain hygiene

CI runners can produce anything that gets deployed — they are high-value targets. Defaults that meaningfully reduce risk:

• Pin third-party actions by SHA, not tag. Tags are mutable; SHAs aren't. actions/checkout@<sha> with a # v5.0.0 comment for humans. Renovate auto-bumps SHAs while preserving the comment.
• First-party actions (actions/*, docker/*) — pinning by major tag (@v5) is a common compromise; SHA-pin if your threat model warrants it.
• `permissions:` — set at workflow level to the most restrictive scope (contents: read). Elevate per-job as needed (packages: write, id-token: write). The default GITHUB_TOKEN grant is too broad in most repos.
• Dependency Review action on PRs catches known-vulnerable additions before merge.

SHA-pinning + Renovate config snippet in RECIPES.md §4.

5. Secrets & cloud auth

• Prefer OIDC (workload identity federation) over long-lived credentials when the target supports it — AWS, GCP, Azure, HashiCorp Vault, npm + PyPI trusted publishing all do. The runner exchanges a short-lived JWT for a scoped token; no AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID lives in repo secrets.
• When long-lived secrets are unavoidable, scope them to GitHub environments: with required reviewers — not to the repo.
• Never echo a secret in logs. Masking catches direct prints; derivative leaks (a token shaped into a URL, a hash printed for "debugging") happen anyway. Treat any code path that reads ${{ secrets.X }} as opaque.
• Rotate scheduled secrets via a dedicated workflow; track rotation cadence in an ADR.

OIDC trust-policy snippets (AWS + GCP) in RECIPES.md §5.

6. Caching

Cache what's expensive to fetch and safe to reuse:

• Language deps — setup-* actions have built-in cache flags (actions/setup-go with cache: true, actions/setup-python with cache: 'pip' or 'uv'). Prefer those over hand-rolled actions/cache blocks.
• Build artifacts — only cache compiled outputs when builds are deterministic. Non-deterministic build → stale cache → mystery failures that waste hours.
• Docker layer cache — docker/build-push-action with cache-from: type=gha + cache-to: type=gha,mode=max is the GitHub-native option. A registry cache (type=registry,ref=<image>:cache) survives across runners and is the better default for prod images.
• Key the cache on the lockfile hash. Collisions silently degrade builds.

Per-language caching examples in RECIPES.md §6.

7. Matrix strategy

Fan out only when the dimension genuinely matters:

• OS matrix — only if you ship cross-platform binaries or have OS-specific code paths.
• Language version matrix — only if you support multiple. A library targeting "Python 3.12+" tests 3.12, 3.13, 3.14; an app pinning 3.14 doesn't need a matrix.
• `fail-fast: false` when you want to see all failures (compatibility surveys); default true saves CI minutes when any failure is a blocker.

Trade-off: every matrix cell costs runner time + log volume. A 3×3×2 matrix is 18 jobs — each dimension should justify itself or come out.

8. Test gates + required status checks

• Required checks live on the branch protection rule, not in workflow YAML. The workflow runs the test; the rule decides whether main can merge.
• Name jobs explicitly and stably — required checks reference the job name. Renaming a job silently makes the rule unenforceable until someone notices and re-checks it.
• Soft gates (coverage delta, performance regression) post a PR comment; hard gates fail the job.
• Flaky tests — quarantine fast (mark skip with a tracking issue), don't normalize retry. Retry-as-default trains the team to ignore real flakiness.

9. Build & artifact publishing

This skill covers the workflow shape, not the Dockerfile — see docker-architect for image rules.

• Multi-arch images — docker/setup-qemu-action + docker/setup-buildx-action + docker/build-push-action with platforms: linux/amd64,linux/arm64.
• Build once, push many — build the image once, push with multiple tags (:<short-sha>, :<semver>, :latest) in one action. Parallel rebuilds for tags are an antipattern.
• Sign with Cosign + OIDC for prod-bound images (no key material). Verify on pull in the deployment platform.
• SBOM — generated alongside the image via docker/build-push-action attestations (provenance: true, sbom: true).

Full build + push workflow in RECIPES.md §9.

10. Release automation

• Conventional Commits → version + changelog is the cheapest workable pattern. Tools: release-please (GitHub-native, manifest-driven), semantic-release (Node ecosystem), git-cliff (Rust-based, language-agnostic). Pick one and own it; switching costs are low.
• Tag-driven release workflow — on: push: tags: 'v*' triggers the build-and-publish workflow. Decoupling "version bump merged" from "artifact published" makes a failed release retryable.
• Pre-release tags (v1.2.0-rc.1) get pushed to a separate channel (npm next, container :rc, Go pseudo-versions).

release-please workflow + manifest in RECIPES.md §10.

11. Deployment strategies

Pick by blast radius, not by fashion:

• Direct deploy — fine for low-risk services with a healthy rollback story. Don't over-engineer.
• Blue-green — two parallel environments, flip traffic atomically. Best when rollback must be instant.
• Canary — route a percentage of traffic to the new version, ramp over time. Needs traffic-shaping + per-version metrics to mean anything.
• Manual approval gate — environments: with required reviewers on prod. Cheap, high-signal, no infra needed; pairs with any of the above.

Whatever the strategy, the deploy workflow must be idempotent and re-runnable. A failed deploy mid-flight should be safe to retry without manual cleanup.

12. Out of scope

• Deep Kubernetes / Argo / Flux — future kubernetes-architect (planned).
• Infrastructure provisioning (Terraform, Pulumi) — future iac-architect (planned).
• Per-language test conventions — see the matching language architect (go-architect, python-architect).
• Container security in depth — see docker-architect §4, §10.
• Vulnerability findings catalog — workflow runs the scanner; security-reviewer interprets the findings.