**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
Questions about this idea?
FlyBot reads the scoring and gives you a second opinion on “Support "multi-choice" input type for manual workflows”.
Risks
Next steps
Fly Labs Method
Is the pain real, is there a gap, is it the right time, can one person build it.
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
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
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
Hi HN!I recently switched from a Fedora/GNOME laptop to a MacBook Air. My old setup served me well as a portable workstation, but I’ve started traveling more while working remotely and needed something with similar performance but better battery life. The main thing I missed was a simple taskbar that shows the windows in the current workspace instead of a Dock that mixes everything together.I built boringBar so I would not have to use the Dock. It shows only the windows in the current Space, lets you switch Spaces by scrolling on the bar, and adds a desktop switcher so you can jump directly to any Space. You can also hide the system Dock, pin apps, preview windows with thumbnails, and launch apps from a searchable menu (I keep Spotlight disabled because for some reason it uses a lot of system resources on my machine).I’ve been dogfooding it for a few months now, and it finally felt polished enough to share.It’s for people who like macOS but want window management to feel a bit more like GNOME, Windows, or a traditional taskbar. It’s also for people like me who wanted an easier transition to macOS, especially now that Windows feels increasingly user-hostile.I’d love feedback on the UX, bugs, and whether this solves the same Dock/Spaces pain for anyone else.P.S. It might also appeal to people who feel nostalgic for the GNOME 2 desktop of yore. I started my Linux journey with it, and boringBar brings back some of that feeling for me.
AI
### Describe the project you are working on Godot C# bindings ### Describe the problem or limitation you are having in your project For the past weeks, I've been discussing with several Unity users intending to move to Godot C# regarding dealing with the C# garbage collector. The most common complaint I hear from users is that, in Unity, allocations can trigger unexpected GC spikes into the game. In Godot, we target to make all of the high performance APIs (those that intended to be called every frame) not allocate any memory, so theoretically the GC should not be a problem. Additionally, Godot starting from 4.0, uses the Microsoft CoreCLR version of .net, which also supposedly has a better garbage collector than Unity. But in all, after several discussions with Unity users, neither is enough reassurance for them, and they would really feel safer if Godot exposed a zero allocation API. ### Describe the feature / enhancement and how it helps to overcome the problem or limitation The idea of this proposal is that Godot exposes zero allocation versions of many functions in the C# API, that users can use if they desire. Technically, this could be done from the binding generator itself, without breaking compatibility, and without doing any modification to Godot itself. ### Describe how your proposal will work, with code, pseudo-code, mock-ups, and/or diagrams **WARNING** I am not familiar with C#, so take this as pseudocode. Imagine you have two functions exposed as to C#: ```C# void MyClass.SetArray( Vector2[] array); Vector2[] MyClass.GetArray(); ``` This works and is pretty and intuitive. However, it has two problems: * GC is allocated on return * Memory is copied to Godot native formats every time there is a call. The idea is to add NoAlloc versions, which can be generated directly by the binder automatically when required: ```C# void MyClass.SetArrayNoAlloc( Godot.Collections.PackedVector2Array array); void MyCl
AI