Live data from Hacker News

GitHub issue - resolved

githubstatus.com

131–140 of 169 posts

Re: GitHub issue - resolved

#131

Only code with Github is replicated locally, not everything else like wiki, issues, etc. That's something I love about Fossil. Everything with Fossil (wiki, issues, code) is replicated as well.

You can keep issues within git itself: https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug

Re: GitHub issue - resolved

#133

One wonders if MSFT leadership will ever connect the dots between “hollowing out talent over the years,” “hiring freezes,” and “layoffs” to this outcome. One wonders sometimes if that’s the goal.

I'd long assumed the opposite, but maybe Azure DevOps is the Git web interface they're betting on long-term.

Re: GitHub issue - resolved

#135
post #94

Now's a good opportunity to ask about alternative Git hosts. What other services do HNers use? I've been unwilling to host any personal projects on GH after Copilot launched and it because clear that GH/MS doesn't really respect the authors of the code they host. Honestly open source in general has gotten a little less compelling to me after Copilot. The recent security issue at GH has also turned me off even more on…

If you're into self hosting, soft-serve is a really cool CLI based git server from Charmbracelet that is about a half step above a bare git repo over SSH https://github.com/charmbracelet/soft-serve

That is pretty slick. Not having to deal with file permissions when limited access to collaborators sounds nice. Can't say I haven't messed that up before.

Re: GitHub issue - resolved

#136
post #11

It goes down every month like I said before [0]. The last time this happened was 2 days ago [1] then weeks ago [2] and it is evident that it is falling apart in front of us. First, it was the RSA key leak in [1][3], then the site's key expired causing down time again [2] and now this. I don't think anyone can tell me with a straight face that GitHub was any more reliable or better when Microsoft acquired it. It is no…

NB: GitHub was purchased by MS 5 years ago. All these events are in the last month.

It's apparant that it wasn't without issues prior to acquisition (e.g. a quick search for GitHub issues prior to 2018 gives this: https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/31/github-goes-down-and-takes...) - reporting issues in 2017, 2015, and 2012.

I don't have the data to comment on whether it was better before or after MS acquisition, but would suggest this isn't the best sample size to base any conclusions on.

Re: GitHub issue - resolved

#137
post #102

Git Docs... - https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-About-Version... "...The next major issue that people encounter is that they need to collaborate with developers on other systems. To deal with this problem, Centralized Version Control Systems (CVCSs) were developed. These systems (such as CVS, Subversion, and Perforce) have a single server that contains all the versioned files, and a number of clients tha…

Git avoids the problem where the central service being down gets in the way of local development. Even in Git, that central service going down means degraded collaboration. Normally a Git remote is just an ssh-accessible machine, and so pretty resilient. But GitHub is a lot more complex, so apparently that simple service went down, along with all the features they built on top of it

You don't actually need the central service. In an emergency, a team could work entirely over email via diffs like Linus does.

Re: GitHub issue - resolved

#138
post #94

Now's a good opportunity to ask about alternative Git hosts. What other services do HNers use? I've been unwilling to host any personal projects on GH after Copilot launched and it because clear that GH/MS doesn't really respect the authors of the code they host. Honestly open source in general has gotten a little less compelling to me after Copilot. The recent security issue at GH has also turned me off even more on…

At my previous work almost everything was self-hosted including Git and servers to run machine learning models. The only exception was Jira. The company owned the servers and rented the space in a datacenter. For code reviews we had Critic.

At the new work we use BitBucket, but for reviews its UI is strictly worse than Critic. And on top of it it is strictly more expensive than self-hosting experience including paying for a competent sysadmin.

I understand that cloud allows to offload a lot of headaches, but I really see no point in using cloud services for development. Even for a small company a dedicated server with another to spare in case of failures will be cheaper and it’s administration will be trivial.

Re: GitHub issue - resolved

#139
post #102

Git Docs... - https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2/Getting-Started-About-Version... "...The next major issue that people encounter is that they need to collaborate with developers on other systems. To deal with this problem, Centralized Version Control Systems (CVCSs) were developed. These systems (such as CVS, Subversion, and Perforce) have a single server that contains all the versioned files, and a number of clients tha…

I’m not a big Git/GitHub user but presumably distributed version control is still superior to Systems like Subversion that don’t provide a full clone of the repo, as you can still work during GitHub downtime and then use the good branch merging tools to merge back after the outage?

Re: GitHub issue - resolved

#140
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I Think he was referring to Google Search in general. I've never witness since Google went live in 1998 any Google Search downtime. Probably happened but I can not remember it.

Google Search is still a RO system - you are mostly just retrieving information from a search index.

How do you know that?
Post reply on HN