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

211–220 of 853 posts

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#211

Post by wiether »

eduardogarza wrote: post #136

This is my first comment on HN despite being a user for over a decade -- this is one of the most outrageous pricing changes I've encountered - I couldn't believe it when I read the email earlier (I run self-hosted runners). Anyone using GitLab or any other VCM that you'd recommend? I'm absolutely done with Github. Or is everything else just as bad?

Gitea!

And the best (maybe?) part in your case is that the CI is based on GH Actions, so you can probably reuse your workflows without the need to adapt them.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#213

Post by Eikon »

theLiminator wrote: post #182
Eikon wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On ZeroFS [0] I am doing around 80 000 minutes a month. A lot of it is wasted in build time though, due to a lack of appropriate caching facilities with GitHub actions. [0] https://github.com/Barre/ZeroFS/tree/main/.github/workflows

Wow, that's a very cool project.

Thank you!

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#214

Post by llama052 »

I guess this is on brand for Microsoft. Just lame to go through the trouble to self host runners and still get tacked on with fees after the fact.

Hard for me to feel like our industry is innovating and not just gouging with the rest in the battle for enshittification.

I will intentionally start exploring other options even if the cost isn't high, because I don't want to support this type of thing.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#215

Post by K3UL »

mtlynch wrote: post #140

> In the past, our customers have asked us how GitHub views third-party runners long-term. The platform fee largely answers that: GitHub now monetizes Actions usage regardless of where jobs run, aligning third-party runners like Blacksmith as ecosystem partners rather than workarounds. It does? I feel like it implies that they want third-party runners like Blacksmith out of the ecosystem, which is why they're now fin…

That's clearly the case, this is a three-pronged manoeuver :

- Introducing a cheap 1-core runner

- Lowering the price of GitHub-hosted runners

- Making it slightly more expensive to use self-hosted runners

- There is actually a fourth one: the vnet integration, which also allows you to run public runners in your own infra

As a bonus, for some people it means something that was free is now not free. Those who are willing to pay rather than go, might prefer to use GitHub-hosted if they are going to pay anyway.

This is clearly an incentive to use github-hosted, and their sales reps are also going this way.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#217

Post by sytse »

amarant wrote: post #161

Getting acquired by Microsoft is a death sentence for any product. The only variable is how long after acquisition before they gut it. It's almost never right away. GitHub was acquired 7 years ago, but it started showing symptoms perhaps 2 years ago. With this I think it's clear the wound was fatal. GitHub will stumble on for a few more years with ever-decreasing quality, before going the way of Skype. So, I guess we…

In case you're considering moving to GitLab we currently have no plans that I'm aware of to pay from bringing your own runners. Happy to answer any questions.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#218

Post by NewJazz »

sylens wrote: post #135
Arcuru wrote: post #2

> We are introducing a $0.002 per-minute Actions cloud platform charge for all Actions workflows across GitHub-hosted and self-hosted runners. Charging for self-hosted runners is an interesting choice. That's the same cost as their smallest hosted runners [1] [1] - https://docs.github.com/en/billing/reference/actions-runner-...

Pushing you towards their hosted runners which will show up in their Azure usage numbers and drive the stock price

Ah yes, vertical integration and oligopoly.

Really Dianne?

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#219

Post by pferde »

rcy wrote: post #177
amarant wrote: post #161

Getting acquired by Microsoft is a death sentence for any product. The only variable is how long after acquisition before they gut it. It's almost never right away. GitHub was acquired 7 years ago, but it started showing symptoms perhaps 2 years ago. With this I think it's clear the wound was fatal. GitHub will stumble on for a few more years with ever-decreasing quality, before going the way of Skype. So, I guess we…

hopefully something decentralized like https://tangled.org

Hopefully something ForgeFed-powered, so that we can all re-decentralize, as is right and proper.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#220

Post by seniorThrowaway »

BugsJustFindMe wrote: post #94

Everyone in this thread has gone absolutely insane. $5/month gets you 41 fucking _hours_ of continuous operation. If you're not utterly abusing the platform, this falls extremely below the threshold of caring. And if not, what the fuck are you even doing with all those hours? The new per-minute charge is less than one millisecond of engineer labor cost.

I have a nightly software build of a piece of software that takes 6 hours to create a 70GB artifact. The build process requires a GPU so it runs on my own HW. That's ~180 hours per month for this job alone. Is that really so hard to imagine?
Post reply on HN