GitHub Community
Reusable Workflow Depth Limit #8488
-
|
The depth limit of 2 is too low. For my use case, I'd need at least 3:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 25 comments 22 replies
-
|
Depending on what level of reused you need you could consider composite actions as well. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
So what's the difference between a composite action and a reusable workflow? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
See pyTooling/Actions: Context:
See also pyTooling/Actions: Callable vs dispatchable workflows. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Would love to see this limit increased. Even to The ability to create configurable reusable actions would improve DRYness across repositories. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Github actions is just so disappointing when it comes to re-usability. Look at CircleCI, Github should take notes. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I have to say, this difference between Reusable Workflows and Composites along with the strict 2-level depth limit on reusable workflows adds needless complexity to some pretty basic CI tasks. https://github.blog/2022-02-10-using-reusable-workflows-github-actions/ shows the difference between the two. I fully recognise there should be some depth limit to reusable workflows, but if the limit is 2 then I'd have to question the true use case of this functionality. @automartin5000 simple example is probably a good indication of the "base case" for this functionality. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I have returned and solved my problem by curing myself of my ignorance. For anyone else happening upon this: Seems like a more elegant way to do this is with composite local actions. You have to structure these with a directory under your .github dir like .github/actions/action.yaml as the root file. Reference this from a job via the usual way i.e
and it will use the action.yaml file for you automatically. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Just to clarify for those reading this: add that uses reference to a step within a job, not to the job as if it were a re-usable workflow. see more: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/creating-actions/creating-a-composite-action |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I'd also like to see nested reusable workflows as an option. The alternative of composable actions is wholly inadequate for being able to have DRY and composable YAML workflows (no secrets, seen as a single step, only a single job). The depth limitation forces copy-pasted workflows that are identical but necessary because they cannot be nested. This is impossible right now. One has to block copy the |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Is this depth limit configurable in GHE, or is the 2 hardcoded? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Please address this limitation. Composite actions are not a good alternative for many of the use cases outlined here. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Just want to add to the consensus here, this would be incredibly useful |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
You can now nest up to 4 levels of reusable workflows |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
That's fantastic! Well done team |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Is the error message incorrect (should it say "4" instead of "3")? This is using GH public, not on-prem:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This link is broken atm. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Yes it is, found that url by using search. Why does this link has a |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Have it the 4 limit. Can this be increased to 8 or this limit itself be removed? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Am trying to nest levels with reusable workflow but it fails? What am I doing wrong? Can GitHub action really handle nested workflows? Can someone pls clear this out. File: A.yaml File B.yaml: File C.yaml Am getting: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Ah, I see it has changed since the discussion started. See the accepted answer by @chrispat |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Yes, but it doesnt work for me according to what is written in the documentation. How ever we do have an on-prem GitHub installation. Is there any functionality for GitHub actions that needs to be enabled? Running latest version. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This feature has not shipped in GHES yet. When it does it will be part of the release notes but I think the version that it will be in is 3.7. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanx chrispat for the information! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hi @chrispat, do you know when this increase to workflow depth will make it to GHE? It doesn't appear to be part of 3.7.x thus far. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
3/4 levels is not enough, IMO. It's still very limiting. I've already run into this while writing my very first set of workflows! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Would also like to request this be increased. It honestly seems that this is an unnecessary artificial limitation (or one borne of a suboptimal implementation). Our workflows is not terribly complex -- I'm just trying to reuse some logic between workflows in a monorepo -- but I've hit even the raised limit several times and had to introduce additional complexity to work around it. Composite actions and reusable workflows target two completely different needs and composite actions are not a good substitute for reusable workflows. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The depth limit is a pain if you are promoting DRYness. The reusability is very much limited in GitHub Actions. So the map becomes: flowchart LR
caller.yml --> ci-reuse.yml
ci-reuse.yml --> platform.yml -.-> x64
platform.yml -.-> x86
platform.yml -.-> arm
x64 --> flavor.yml
x86 --> flavor.yml
arm --> flavor.yml
flavor.yml -.-> x64-Release
flavor.yml -.-> x64-Debug
flavor.yml -.-> x86-Release
flavor.yml -.-> x86-Debug
flavor.yml -.-> arm-Release
flavor.yml -.-> arm-Debug
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Unfortunately, just like you guys, I am in the same boat :-(! GH, are there any plans to increase the minimum depth Limit to > 5? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Same issue here. Need a limit increase please. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Limit increase please. It's 3 not 4, in fact. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Please increase the limit |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I agree Github Actions would benefit by increasing the limit or providing clear guidance around how we're supposed to architect systems of reusable CI code without a higher workflow call depth than is currently offered. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
limit |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
This limit is really painful as it leads to a lot of code repetition. :( |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hoping for a limit increase, composite actions are not a workaround. Certain features like "matrix" are limited to workflows, so you can use nested actions but then you can't have loops. You can write a shell loop in an action but then are unable to write a loop that calls another action. Only workflow_dispatch and waiting on completion provides a workaround but a lot of extra scripting. Bumping it up to even 5-7 would provide a lot of flexibility and is far short of typical stack limits. Cheers! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
It's such an own goal, you're better off setting everything to dispatch and use gh cli in your jobs with a custom token. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Can you give an example of this approach? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Especially on orchestration |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Still no news? This unnecessary limitation is very frustrating and against every DRY principle |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I could get by with three levels, but I need them to be grouped in the UI or the UI is useless for following along... it's just a big mess of all the different platforms, precisions, etc I'm building. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Hello :) You can now use up to 10 nested reusable workflows and call up to 50 workflows in total from a given workflow run. The previous limits were four and 20, respectively. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
I know folks may want more, but for now I am going to close this issue. Getting up from the 2 we started with to 10 feels pretty solid and I would just <3 a fresh issue with new votes to better judge if we need to go even higher. Sorry this took a while for us to increase but we got there :D |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Only github.com or does it also come in self-hosted github enterprise? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Now the only crib i have is that they improve the UX of a deeply nested pipeline. As of now they just flatten it out and this drops all the associated "hierarchical context" to the user of the pipeline. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
and others
Hello :)
https://github.blog/changelog/2025-11-06-new-releases-for-github-actions-november-2025/
You can now use up to 10 nested reusable workflows and call up to 50 workflows in total from a given workflow run. The previous limits were four and 20, respectively.