Support "multi-choice" input type for manual workflows
**Describe the enhancement** Current set of input types doesn't cover some use-cases for manual workflows We use a single gh-action as an entrypoint of deploying packages from our monorepo, and sometimes we need to manually deploy several packages simultaneously. Up until now we just went with a set of Booleans, so we could tick all the packages we needed to run our CI/CD against via UI. However, we speedily reached a [limit of 10 input values](https://github.com/actions/runner/issues/1928) Introducing an input type that would store a, say, json array could help: ```yaml on: workflow_dispatch: inputs: name: type: multi-choice description: select packages options: - go-service1 - go-service2 - py-service1 ``` ...and in fact would be more logical with less copy-paste overhead for our use-case
FL score
out of 100
Verdict
high confidence
Competition
8
competitors found, emerging market, funded players
Trend
8 community mentions
A niche problem exists for GitHub Actions manual workflow inputs, but building a direct solution as a solo builder is impossible, and an external wrapper's demand for payment is unproven.
The pain
The gap
Build angle
Strengths
- The pain point is real and specific, evidenced by a GitHub issue.
- The target audience (heavy GitHub Actions users) is identifiable.
- Solves a specific friction point that causes daily frustration for those affected.
Risks
- A solo builder cannot implement this directly into GitHub Actions, making the core idea unbuildable as described.
- If built as an external tool, willingness to pay for a solution to a core platform limitation is unproven and potentially low.
- GitHub could implement this feature themselves, nullifying any external solution's value.
- The market for this specific problem within GitHub Actions is niche, limiting scalability.
- Monetization for such a specific feature as a standalone product is challenging; it'd likely need to be part of a larger, more complex tool.
Next steps
- Conduct interviews with developers actively hitting the 10-input limit in GitHub Actions to understand their current workarounds and validate if they would pay for an external tool addressing this specific issue.
- Research existing GitHub Marketplace apps or custom workflow generators to see if anyone has attempted a similar abstraction, and analyze their success/failure.
- Explore if this feature could be developed as an open-source GitHub Action, which could gain adoption and potentially lead to a sponsored project or related paid services, rather than a standalone SaaS.
Fly Labs Method
Is the pain real, is there a gap, is it the right time, can one person build it.
- Problem clarity
- 24
- Solution gap
- 10
- Willingness to pay
- 10
- Buildability
- 10
The idea addresses a real pain point within GitHub Actions for high-volume users, but the proposed solution (modifying GitHub Actions directly) is not feasible for a solo builder. Re-interpreting it as an external tool creates new challenges regarding market gap and payment signals.
Value Equation
Dream outcome and how likely it feels, against the time and effort it costs.
This idea has low market viability and differentiation for a solo builder, as it's essentially a feature request for a large platform, making monetization and feasibility challenging.
One-Person Business
Curiosity pull, identity fit, and a path from free value to paid for a solo creator.
A clear problem exists for a niche audience, but the idea as a solo builder product is problematic due to implementation constraints and monetization challenges.
Viral Frameworks
Hook strength, shareability, and how cheaply it can be tested.
While the target audience is specific, the value proposition and business model for a micro-SaaS are weak due to the nature of the problem as a platform feature request.
Builder Lens
Evidence the problem exists, timing, defensibility, and a model that fits on a napkin.
A specific, desperate user exists, but the ability to deliver a minimum viable paid solution and its future-proofness are highly questionable.
Why this verdict
Five lenses, one composite. How scoring works
The angle
This weekend
- Conduct interviews with developers actively hitting the 10-input limit in GitHub Actions to understand their current workarounds and validate if they would pay for an external tool addressing this specific issue.
- Research existing GitHub Marketplace apps or custom workflow generators to see if anyone has attempted a similar abstraction, and analyze their success/failure.
- Explore if this feature could be developed as an open-source GitHub Action, which could gain adoption and potentially lead to a sponsored project or related paid services, rather than a standalone SaaS.
Who is already there, emerging market
Connects various apps and automates workflows through 'Zaps', which can include multi-step automations and forms.
Pricing: Free plan (100 tasks/month), Professional ($19.99/month billed annually for 750 tasks), Team ($69/month billed annually for 2,000 tasks), Enterprise (custom pricing). Prices scale with tasks.
An online form builder that allows users to create custom forms with various input types, including multi-choice, and automate data collection workflows.
Pricing: Starter (Free - 5 forms, 100 submissions/month), Bronze ($34/month billed annually), Silver ($39/month billed annually), Gold ($99/month billed annually), Enterprise (custom pricing).
Creates interactive and conversational forms and surveys with various question types, including multi-choice, for data collection and lead generation.
Pricing: Free plan, Basic ($29/month), Plus ($59/month), Business ($99/month), Growth Essentials ($199/month), Growth Pro ($349/month), Enterprise/Growth Custom (custom pricing). Prices vary with responses and features.
Document automation software that helps create, send, and e-sign documents, often including forms with input fields for data collection.
Pricing: Free e-sign (60 docs/year), Starter ($19/user/month billed annually), Business ($49/user/month billed annually), Enterprise (custom pricing).
A leading e-signature platform that also offers features for document generation and workflow automation, which can involve structured input.
Pricing: Personal ($10-15/month), Standard ($25-45/user/month billed annually), Business Pro ($40-65/user/month billed annually), Advanced Solutions/Enterprise (custom pricing). Plans have envelope limits.
A no-code cloud-based workflow automation software that allows for building custom forms and managing processes.
Pricing: Basic ($1,500/month), Enterprise (custom pricing). No free version.
Provides workflow automation and process management solutions, including forms with various input types for collecting data within workflows.
Pricing: Paid plans start from $625/month. Trial available, but no free plan. Enterprise solutions typically start above $5,000 annually.
Offers mobile forms and data collection, enabling businesses to create custom forms with various input fields for field service and other industries.
Pricing: Pro ($49/user/month, 3-user minimum, billed annually), Max ($79/user/month). No free plan.
What they charge
What people say, 8 mentions
My YouTube videos get 100 views. They generate $12,000/month.
r/SaaS
My sales LinkedIn account got banned 2 months ago, spent weeks figuring out WHY and now testing something different (need your input)
r/SaaS
How you can make the most with Google ads as a small business
r/Entrepreneur
How building something which solves MY OWN issue made me actually finish the project
r/Entrepreneur
We went from 93% signup drop-off to 13.6% email verification rate by removing one modal — 14 funnel lessons from a fintech SaaS in Mexico
r/SaaS
Month 2 of our profitable SaaS — high margins, strong growth, but stuck on how to scale
r/Entrepreneur
Form builders look simple — until you try to build one
r/SaaS
How much should I charge to community manage servers?
r/Entrepreneur
Recent news
GitHub Actions: Input types for manual workflows
GitHub Changelog, November 10, 2021
GitHub Actions: Late March 2026 updates
GitHub Changelog, March 19, 2026
Pricing changes for GitHub Actions
GitHub Changelog, December 16, 2025
Market signals
The market for workflow automation and data collection, including multi-choice input types, is robust and growing, especially with the increased adoption of AI orchestration. Companies like Zapier are integrating AI features into their platforms, and there's a clear demand for flexible, scalable solutions. Recent GitHub Actions pricing updates reflect a move towards aligning consumption patterns with costs, indicating an active and evolving market for workflow tools.
What frustrates people
- Users complain about Zapier's costs escalating quickly with increased task usage.
- Many essential features in DocuSign come at an extra cost or are behind higher-tier plans.
- DocuSign's pricing can scale quickly as teams grow due to per-user fees and envelope limits.
- Nintex is often critiqued for its complex pricing structure and unpredictable costs, especially as usage scales.
- PandaDoc users may incur higher costs for bulk sends, API access, or advanced workflows beyond the listed price.
Semble – Code search for agents that uses 98% fewer tokens than grep
Hey HN! We (Stephan and Thomas) recently open-sourced Semble. We kept running into the same problem while using Claude Code on large codebases: when the agent can't find something directly, it falls back to grep, reading full files or launching subagents. This uses a lot of tokens, and often still misses the relevant code. There are existing tools for this, but they were either too slow to index on demand, needed API keys, or had poor retrieval quality.Semble is our solution for this. It combines static Model2Vec embeddings (using our latest static model: potion-code-16M) with BM25, fused via RRF and reranked with code-aware signals. Everything runs on CPU since there's no transformers involved. On our benchmark of ~1250 query/document pairs across 63 repos and 19 languages, it uses 98% fewer tokens than grep+read and reaches 99% of the retrieval quality of a 137M-parameter code-trained transformer, while being ~200x faster.Main features:- Token-efficient: 98% fewer tokens than grep+read- Fast: ~250ms to index a typical repo on our benchmark, ~1.5ms per query on CPU (very large repos may take longer)- Accurate: 0.854 NDCG@10, 99% of the best transformer setup we tested- MCP server: drop-in for Claude Code, Cursor, Codex, OpenCode- Zero config: no API keys, no GPU, no external servicesInstall in Claude Code with: claude mcp add semble -s user -- uvx --from "semble[mcp]" sembleOr check our README for other installation instructions, benchmarks, and methodology:Semble: https://github.com/MinishLab/sembleBenchmarks: https://github.com/MinishLab/semble/tree/main/benchmarksModel: https://huggingface.co/minishlab/potion-code-16MLet us know if you have any feedback or questions!
AI
Postgres extension for BM25 relevance-ranked full-text search
Last summer we faced a conundrum at my company, Tiger Data, a Postgres cloud vendor whose main business is in timeseries data. We were trying to grow our business towards emerging AI-centric workloads and wanted to provide a state-of-the-art hybrid search stack in Postgres. We'd already built pgvectorscale in house with the goal of scaling semantic search beyond pgvector's main memory limitations. We just needed a scalable ranked keyword search solution too.The problem: core Postgres doesn't provide this; the leading Postgres BM25 extension, ParadeDB, is guarded behind AGPL; developing our own extension appeared daunting. We'd need a small team of sharp engineers and 6-12 months, I figured. And we'd probably still fall short of the performance of a mature system like Parade/Tantivy.Or would we? I'd be experimenting long enough with AI-boosted development at that point to realize that with the latest tools (Claude Code + Opus) and an experienced hand (I've been working in database systems internals for 25 years now), the old time estimates pretty much go out the window.I told our CTO I thought I could solo the project in one quarter. This raised some eyebrows.It did take a little more time than that (two quarters), and we got some real help from the community (amazing!) after open-sourcing the pre-release. But I'm thrilled/exhausted today to share that pg_textsearch v1.0 is freely available via open source (Postgres license), on Tiger Data cloud, and hopefully soon, a hyperscalar near you:https://github.com/timescale/pg_textsearchIn the blog post accompanying the release, I overview the architecture and present benchmark results using MS-MARCO. To my surprise, we were not only able to meet Parade/Tantivy's query performance, but exceed it substantially, measuring a 4.7x advantage on query throughput at scale:https://www.tigerdata.com/blog/pg-textsearch-bm25-fu
AI
Consus (YC F24) – LLM gateway for companies handling sensitive data
Hey Hacker News! I'm Eric, the founder of Consus. We route all AI requests to ITAR restricted and controlled unclassified information (CUI) compliant infrastructure. Consus itself satisfies ITAR restrictions, and we recently completed our FedRAMP equivalency audit against the 410 FedRAMP High controls. FedRAMP High is the U.S. government’s strictest security baseline for cloud services handling sensitive unclassified data. A breach of this data could cause severe or catastrophic harm. Achieving FedRAMP equivalency, or authorization, is required before processing CUI information.Demo: https://youtu.be/6MYxJe6P4oYAerospace and defense is experiencing rapid growth. Unfortunately, most companies are struggling to use AI because of necessary data protections & compliance risk. These companies can move even faster if they could use the AI tools that most other industries take for granted.I spent most of my career prior to Consus in aerospace & defense. I launched national security payloads at SpaceX, and was an early employee at Castelion. I’ve watched first hand how compliance red-tape makes it difficult for companies to adopt new technologies and trust vendors that touch their sensitive data. For example, I worked with a satellite manufacturer that doesn’t allow any AI tools, even for non-sensitive work.Even as AI has become extremely useful over the past 9-12 months, I was surprised by how many aerospace & defense companies refused to touch it. They could see how it could be helpful, but they were scared about model providers training on their data, violating an ITAR rule, or risk losing new business because of a failed cyber assessment. These are all rational fears.There were a lot of ways to solve some/all of these problems, but we focused on building a compliant AI inference layer that can "plug" into any AI tool or workflow. Just as OpenRouter integrates with most tools, Consus can connect to tools like ChatGPT or Clau
AI
Questions about this idea?
FlyBot reads the scoring and gives you a second opinion on “Support "multi-choice" input type for manual workflows”.