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

GitHub is having issues now

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 132 posts

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#111

Post by lrvick »

tracker1 wrote: post #89
lrvick wrote: post #74

Every time Github goes down, a few more people move to ethical alternatives and reduce the FOSS community having a SPOF in Microsoft. https://sfconservancy.org/GiveUpGitHub/

While I appreciate the sentiment... there was something nice about the social aspects of many/most projects being on GitHub in terms of collaboration. I think there is starting to be a lot of friction for many reasons. I've been seeing more use of issues as spam, not to mention even more nefarious activities making rounds.

Corpos tend to be on Github, where community focused projects are very rapidly shifting to codeberg, which is fully open source and also has commit signing integration that actually works.

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#113

Post by dymk »

rhdunn wrote: post #50
agartner wrote: post #9

Yeah I think I've finally had enough. I need to start seriously advocating for alternatives since this is starting to impact our business. It's clearly not getting any better.

If you want a GitHub-like UI (with org/repo structure limitations) use either Forgejo or Gitea. If you want a similar but different experience use GitLab. If you want something more akin to the kernel experience (i.e. hosting, flexible repository structure, user auth via ssh keys, and a simple web UI) use gitolite with cgit, or alternatively gitweb.

I love gitea, and I use it for my homelab, but the permissions system needs a lot of work. There’s still an open bug which doesn’t let anyone but the repo owner read CI logs regardless of settings.

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#114

Post by dymk »

lioeters wrote: post #97
homebrewer wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go ahead. We've been self-hosting Gitea with Drone/Woodpecker for years; either it or Forgejo will do fine if you're okay with their feature set. I sometimes wander into these GitHub threads to have a laugh; our Gitea instance has had several minutes of downtime combined over the last few years, all of them planned (to upgrade Gitea) and in the middle of the night.

Ooh, Woodpecker CI works with Gitea and Forgejo. https://woodpecker-ci.org/ That might be last piece I needed to migrating Git repos from GitHub to a self-hosted forge. Edit: Actually there's Gitea Actions and Forgejo Actions, that might be enough for my use case. https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/ https://forgejo.org/docs/next/user/actions/reference/

I’ve found gitea actions (based on ACT, so it’s nearly identical to a GitHub action runner) to work great. Migrating a GitHub workflow is mostly just a file name change.

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#115

Post by lioeters »

dymk wrote: post #114
lioeters wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ooh, Woodpecker CI works with Gitea and Forgejo. https://woodpecker-ci.org/ That might be last piece I needed to migrating Git repos from GitHub to a self-hosted forge. Edit: Actually there's Gitea Actions and Forgejo Actions, that might be enough for my use case. https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/ https://forgejo.org/docs/next/user/actions/reference/

I’ve found gitea actions (based on ACT, so it’s nearly identical to a GitHub action runner) to work great. Migrating a GitHub workflow is mostly just a file name change.

Good to know!

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#116

Post by move-on-by »

yearolinuxdsktp wrote: post #108
scottbez1 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was surprised that incident didn’t seem to get as much attention since that was a pretty major data corruption bug, but I guess it was a much smaller scope of impacted repos/customers than a lot of these availability issues?

Merge queues are not as frequently used… ~2000 PRs affected over 4 hours. I reckon that’s on the order of 10 commits per tenant. It’s a feature with low traction, probably because it creates more problems than it solves.

Merge queues are great.

The bug only affected repos using merge queues AND squash/rebase merging (instead of the default merge commit)

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#117

Post by MarkMarine »

scottbez1 wrote: post #76
dclowd9901 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or last week's "If you use merge queue, oopsie, we accidentally destroyed your trunk", which also failed silently.

I was surprised that incident didn’t seem to get as much attention since that was a pretty major data corruption bug, but I guess it was a much smaller scope of impacted repos/customers than a lot of these availability issues?

Definitely got attention during the prod outage at my work. I’m going to find another alternative, I’m sick of this terrible uptime.

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#118

Post by bonesss »

dclowd9901 wrote: post #106
scottbez1 wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was surprised that incident didn’t seem to get as much attention since that was a pretty major data corruption bug, but I guess it was a much smaller scope of impacted repos/customers than a lot of these availability issues?

Without reaching for my tin foil hat, I have a feeling MS is able to suppress these incidents somehow, because yeah, that one was pretty bad.

Wrapping my face in tinfoil: across the board, Amazon, Microsoft, GitHub, Anthropic and OpenAI, I’m seeing a lot of top-level service issues that sound an awful lot like code hitting production that hasn’t been fully tested.

Breaking buttons on the website is one thing, kinda, but Enterprise used to mean a certain degree of robustness and seriousness in product management.

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#119

Post by ahartmetz »

BoingBoomTschak wrote: post #90
1970-01-01 wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised GitLab isn't getting more attention. Yes, its not a carbon copy, but it is close. Apples and pears instead of oranges.

It's close in the sense that it's also Jabbascript SPA crap that needs a supercomputer just to (try and fail to) display a diff of a few thousands lines, you mean? We're using it at work and it sucks massively.

I'd rather have the open core one running on my own servers (i.e. GitLab), but performance is a few orders of magnitude away from acceptable for both Git**b.

Re: GitHub is having issues now

#120

Post by bonesss »

r14c wrote: post #84
fishtoaster wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not to say that things haven't gotten worse over time, but... I don't think that chart shows what it seems like it shows. There were plenty of pre-2018 outages that don't show up there: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateEnd=1545696000&dateRange=custom&... An alternate interpretation of that chart is "After the microsoft acquisition, they got serious about actually tracking outages." That said, anecdotally, it's fel…

They're moving to Azure and had to fix up Azure first to be stable enough for GH to even consider moving. I'm guessing its a combo of Azure still not being stable enough and a byproduct of trying to move an entire company's operations from a physical DC into a cloud while its running.

Speculation from afar: clouds are not commensurate, and high-volume cloud services are going to anchor key architectural decisions around technical benefits/realities of the cloud environment they target. Moving GitHub isn’t a tech decision, and it’s broadly a Dumb Idea.

I think GitHub is well past the complexity threshold where the reflective architecting that happens during cloud development can’t be separated from product. If the Engineers were begging for Azure it’d be one thing, but otherwise this is destabilizing churn.

I agree Azure needed a lift to even handle the job, and see the that gap as indicative of a more fundamental challenge. That change is kinda like a skeleton transplant… managements feelings and post-surgery desires don’t necessarily account for the impact and essential difficulty.

Post reply on HN