Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We are investigating reports of degraded performance

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 152 posts

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#111

Post by andrewaylett »

swatcoder wrote: post #103
andrewaylett wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not entirely clear to me whether you're talking about using GitHub for your own production tooling, or as a source for some arbitraty third party component. If it's the latter, then I completely agree with you. Use a read-through proxying package repository. I don't care if you run it yourself or if you pay a provider, but don't pull stuff from the origin every time you build. In the general case, adoping an ext…

Yeah, I was talking about access to third-party dependencies, which I had assumed was the crisis the OP had in mind. I've since read many sibling replies fret over build automation or source code storage, but some downtime in build automation will rarely damage customers and (my goodness) I hope people aren't trusting the only copy of all their IP to a business partner and that they always have a very recent backup s…

Some things are disappointingly hard to back up properly. Source code isn't really in that category.

There's still a question of how strong an ownership we need -- for example, my mail server is owned by OVH, and its backups are sent to rsync.net. I consider that to be sufficent ownership of backups. I'm much more likely to lose my files than they are.

I'm sure that GitHub also have backups, but they're not for the benefit of their customers.

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#112

Post by crdrost »

dleslie wrote: post #14
antoineMoPa wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If only there was a decentralized system to allow version management of code.

Sadly, GitHub doesn't store its value-add assets within the repository itself; so all of the PR conversations, Gists, Issues, and so forth aren't within git itself.

This speaks to one of my secret desires, I've worked at a bunch of small companies now where the workflows were all ad-hoc and I feel like even at bigger companies there are persistent failures to "understand Git"... one of the most pernicious being that, most companies have a modernist "this is prod, it is one place running one codebase" approach, Git is postmodernist "here is this project, there are many branches showing different perspectives on what this code could be", most CI/CD systems in my opinion sit at the interface between these and choose the wrong side to be on, they choose the Git side -- "we ask every branch, 'do you want to deploy yourself to prod?' and if it says yes by virtue of having a CI.yaml file with a branch filter naming itself to be run, then we deploy it to prod."

So what I want is kind of to build a company that's just strongly opinionated about that... "everything is in one Git repository, the `main` branch is authoritative for ACLs and CI/CD config, the bugtracker writes issues directly into that repository and has an ACL role that allows it to do that, the RFC widget writes your code design docs directly in there as well, we do rebase but we merge without fast-forwarding, you have to use semver and it works like this..." and probably nobody will use our offering because "GitHub is more trustworthy" but "if anybody does they'll love us" haha

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#113

Post by dleslie »

lolinder wrote: post #109
davisr wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's by-design, and it's why no one should ever use Microsoft GitHub -- because you don't own your data, Microsoft does.

It's the way the open source options work too (GitLab, Gitea, Forgejo), and they don't have any sinister motive for that—it's just easier to build that way.

There's git-bug, which is in-repo.

https://github.com/MichaelMure/git-bug/

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#114

Post by misnome »

hotnfresh wrote: post #35
misnome wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s crazy that there is no common CI spec. Every single platform is completely different. Last time I tried Act it had some pretty severe limitations. Perhaps I should take it for another spin.

The common CI spec is sh & make, but everybody hates those I guess. Git hook management's really awkward. Even with tools to synchronize them (... all of them? You may want some that are just for your own use) it's a pain. "I want these hooks to run, in order, but only when a merge commit happens on a machine with such-and-such designation, and I want it to run the task on a different machine, but we need to make sur…

> The common CI spec is sh & make, but everybody hates those I guess.

These aren't very good at some of the things you actually want to use a CI for, other than the literal "build" step (which probably is using them anyway, or the per-language equivalent).

Coordinating _and visualising_ multiple builds where some parts run in parallel (e.g. multiplatform), or parts that might be different or skipped depending on how the flow was triggered. Managing caches and artifacts between stages and between runs. Managing running in different contexts, including generic shell and across multiple machine types. A consistent way to manage and inject secrets. Reusing common parts across different CI workflows.

I suppose you could have a parent job taking up a full slot to run a Makefile that launches and manages the running of jobs on other nodes, but imagine you'd have to step into some toolset that abstracts some of it, and hope that is shared development or you end up with an in-house convoluted nightmare of shell scripts.

"Something DAG and yaml shaped" is about the closest convergence we have gotten, and the closest that it looks like we'll get.

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#115

Post by [deleted] »

BHSPitMonkey wrote: post #85
perihelions wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- 'one more step away from a corporate-controlled internet" Downvote me to grey-world if you like, but I think everyone's crazy to put all their code infrastructure in the hands of fucking Microsoft . Especially literal free open-source software. Who do you think Microsoft is? What do you know of Microsoft's history and their core values (they're "embrace, extinguish & exsanguinate"). It's like giving fucking Sauron…

What exactly is the risk? That they'll stop providing the services they sell today? The design of git makes switching to another primary remote very easy (granted, most users probably don't have good habits around backing up data from Issues/Wiki/Releases and risk losing that data if it's taken away suddenly -- but the repo itself is durable and portable on a whim.

[deleted]

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#116

Post by dingdong33 »

rvba wrote: post #105

Question. Recently github is pushing very agressively for two factor authenticartion. So I installed the authenticator app. But the authenticator does not work when the clock on my phone is not perfectly synchronized. But my phone's clock is intentionally sped up by +15 minutes? What to do?

Synchronize your clock.

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#118

Post by rvba »

dingdong33 wrote: post #116
rvba wrote: post #105

Question. Recently github is pushing very agressively for two factor authenticartion. So I installed the authenticator app. But the authenticator does not work when the clock on my phone is not perfectly synchronized. But my phone's clock is intentionally sped up by +15 minutes? What to do?

Synchronize your clock.

I want my clock to be sped up by 15 minutes.

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#119

Post by verve_rat »

rglullis wrote: post #38

I need a macro template for those memes with Bart Simpson on the blackboard and make it say "I will always have a backup plan for third-party services". Seriously people: gitea exists. Gitlab self-hosted exists. Drone/Woodpecker CI exists. It's not that difficult to set up a project that does not depend on Github. I spent less time setting these up than the amount of down time that Github has had this year.

Or, just take the rest of the day off? The world will still be there after the weekend.

Re: We are investigating reports of degraded performance

#120

Post by darkwater »

malfist wrote: post #106
tmpz22 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except they know you've accessed it previously. Its a different threat model that leaves room for a little more agency to be given to the user.

I think if they can't access the server for authentication, it's likely they can't retrieve history either. Or know which user to pull history for

Cookies? When you are not authenticated, it's still a 1st party.
Post reply on HN