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

Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

resources.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 853 posts

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#41

Post by btown »

kjuulh wrote: post #23
MathiasPius wrote: post #16

Introducing a separate charge specifically targeting those of your customers who choose to self-host your hilariously fragile infrastructure is certainly a choice.. And one I assume is in no way tied to adoption/usage-based KPIs. Of course, if you can just fence in your competition and charge admission, it'd be silly to invest time in building a superior product.

We've self-hosted github actions in the past, and self-hosting it doesn't help all that much with the fragile part. For github it is just as much triggering the actions as it is running them. ;) I hope the product gets some investment, because it has been unstable for such a long time, that on the inside it must be just the usual right now. GitHub has by far the worst uptime of any SaaS tools we use at the moment, an…

> call Brent so he can fix it again

Not sure if a Phoenix Project reference, but if it is, it's certainly in keeping with Github being as fragile as the company in the book!

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#45

Post by woodruffw »

lherron wrote: post #37

Why would the self-hosted runner fee be per-minute instead of per-job? I don’t get it.

I had the same question — I understand that the Actions control plane has costs on self-hosted runners that GitHub would like to recoup, but those costs are fixed per-job. Charging by the minute for the user’s own resources gives the impression that GitHub is actually trying to disincentivize third-party runners.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#46

Post by kjuulh »

btown wrote: post #41
kjuulh wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've self-hosted github actions in the past, and self-hosting it doesn't help all that much with the fragile part. For github it is just as much triggering the actions as it is running them. ;) I hope the product gets some investment, because it has been unstable for such a long time, that on the inside it must be just the usual right now. GitHub has by far the worst uptime of any SaaS tools we use at the moment, an…

> call Brent so he can fix it again Not sure if a Phoenix Project reference, but if it is, it's certainly in keeping with Github being as fragile as the company in the book!

It is xD On the outside it feels like a product held together with duct tape, wood glue and prayers.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#47

Post by seniorThrowaway »

I've been running self hosted runners for my company using Actions Runner Controller (ARC) on my own kubernetes infrastructure. Could never really get the devs invested in GitOps style dev cycles so I may just chuck actions and use a more nightly or on demand style build server since that seems to be what they desire and expect. I always expected this day to come so my actions use very little github/actions specific stuff, mainly they just kick off scripts already. I do wonder how hard it would be to create my own github API pollers etc but not sure I want to invest any further in anything github specific. Good news is the effective date is March and the initial prices for my usage will probably be very low but I fully expect them to push further price increases / monetization / lock-in.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#49

Post by sltr »

> Self-hosted runners: You will be charged for using the GitHub Actions cloud platform from March 1, 2026

The GitHub encrapification finally affects me. I am militantly unwilling to pay per minute to use my own computer. Time to leave. I can trigger and monitor builds myself thank you very much.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#50

Post by xp84 »

nstart wrote: post #6
tom1337 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep - Bitbucket made a similar move recently and I guess they are just following along. I'd love to get the justification of that fee tho… Edit: Confused GitLab and Bitbucket

I initially felt a bit offended when I saw this. Then I thought about it and at the end of the day there's a decent amount of infrastructure that goes into displaying the build information, updating it, scanning for secrets and redacting, etc. I don't know if it's worth the amount they are targeting, but it's definitely not zero either.

You would think the fat monthly per-seat license fee we also pay would be enough to cover the costs of checks notes reading some data from the DB and hosting JSON APIs and webpages.
Post reply on HN