But yes, your observation is my whole complaint: it is not _reasonable_ to ask a GLCI developer to run a local copy of GL, complete with any shared GLCI template repos, in a local docker container just to have local execution. Maybe I wouldn't complain about it so much had I not started with circleci so long ago and had such a "wow, this is amazing" followed by gitlab-runner's :troll_face: -- to say nothing of GitHub Actions just straight up ignoring that whole demographic and hoping https://github.com/nektos/act emulates enough to have people not notice the massive feature gap
My go to workflow for workflows (ha) is forking a repo as a private fork and toying on it until I'm happy with the results
Even if we had a local runner, if it takes a ton of time to start and complete every step, it'd be almost as painful to debug as a remote runner taking the same time. On the other hand, if the cloud runner is ridiculously fast, and completes steps on the order of single digit seconds, it would be fairly painless to debug.
When running remotely: edit file > commit > push > switch to browser > browse to pipeline > repeat
Vs locally: edit file > run pipeline > repeat.
I like to do gitlab-runner exec docker … locally, but it doesn’t work with includes and you need to set up your own variables.