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

Days without GitHub incidents

dayswithoutgithubincident.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 178 posts

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#131

Post by otterley »

nimih wrote: post #130
otterley wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me ask the question in reverse: what do you have against them such that the fellow human beings struggling to maintain their operations don’t deserve even a modicum of kindness, respect, and good will? Are you unable to separate the business from the hard working people behind it? It’s not like they don’t know that people like us are counting on them: they recognize that their service is the “dial tone” for much…

I think it's possible to be simultaneously: gracious and supportive towards the developers and ops staff who have been struggling to maintain reasonable uptime on the extremely important piece of shared internet infrastructure that everyone commenting probably relies on (either directly or indirectly) on a daily basis; and spiteful and cruel towards the massive (and, historically speaking, ethically fraught) corporat…

I agree 100%! But this important distinction and nuance seems to be lost here.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#132

Post by rpearl »

xp84 wrote: post #112
dpe82 wrote: post #100

I recently moved all my projects to a self-hosted forgejo instance and have found it quite satisfactory so far. And it's fast! If you're in the market for a github alternative, take a look - there are options.

It’s not fashionable anymore, but I feel that Phabricator deserves an honorable mention as a self-hostable GH alternative too. Actually its “dated” UI is kind of a plus considering how bad everything is now.

It's not "unfashionable". Phabricator has been unmaintained since 2021.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#133

Post by otterley »

estimator7292 wrote: post #120
otterley wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me ask the question in reverse: what do you have against them such that the fellow human beings struggling to maintain their operations don’t deserve even a modicum of kindness, respect, and good will? Are you unable to separate the business from the hard working people behind it? It’s not like they don’t know that people like us are counting on them: they recognize that their service is the “dial tone” for much…

If you pay someone full price to do a job, they know they can't fulfil the terms up front, accept the work, deliver less than the agreed upon terms and still charge you full price, you'd probably call that transaction fraudulent. GitHub is promising service they know they cannot meet, not telling you that, and still charging you full price. What's more, one can argue quite convincingly that they're lying about their…

Fraud is a serious civil and criminal accusation that’s not to be taken or given lightly. Can you detail the fraud that’s being committed? What is the specific promise they made that you’re being deprived of? Remember, the four corners of your agreement with them are controlling.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#134

Post by roadbuster »

jedberg wrote: post #99
roadbuster wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> would break the entire model The "model" - GH effectively allowing an overload of their infra - is already broken > How would a random kid in a 3rd world country ever get noticed enough to enter a trust circle By submitting a quality change with a clear description, preferably with unit tests? Is that no longer considered an acceptable hurdle?

> By submitting a quality change with a clear description, preferably with unit tests? Is that no longer considered an acceptable hurdle? But the proposal is to specifically disallow that unless the person is already known. That is the model today, the one that people want to get rid of.

I think you are taking an excessive interpretation of what was suggested.

Let's level-set on the issue: Of late, GH has suffered a continuous stream of noteworthy outages. It is hypothesized the underlying cause of the instability has been the dramatic rise in submissions from coding agents ("AI"). The open question is how (or whether) GH can get load at a manageable level, with the proposal being, 'don't immediately allocate build/compute resources against any and all submissions.'

I don't see why that is equivalent to rampant disenfranchisement in the open source community. I believe what people have in mind is closer to, "don't immediately trigger an expensive build process as soon as someone submits a pull request."

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#135

Post by pluc »

saghm wrote: post #74
pluc wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm surprised at how little the perception of GitHub changed post-acquisition. Coupled with WSL, it almost balanced things for a lot of people and put Microsoft back in the "benefit of the doubt" column. This is undoing a lot of that, on top of the operational costs. Suddenly the bad press is more noticeable and harder to ignore.

As far as I'm concerned, any benefit of the doubt I might have had for Microsoft is gone after this debaucle: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47989883

You must've been fuming at email clients for the last 20 years hijacking people's signatures eh?

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#136

Post by [deleted] »

tensegrist wrote: post #15
kedihacker wrote: post #3

I don't think aggregating the whole platform into one number is fair. It's like adding the whole aws into one number

splitting the status page like they do, to the point where it is only a bit of humourous exaggeration to say that they track broken `git push` and `git pull` separately, is a sleight of hand / accounting / SLA-fudging that we should not excuse there is a subset of the site that pretty much everyone uses — git, issues, pull requests, actions — and if any part of that is broken then the site is broken and the status pa…

[deleted]

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#137

Post by badsectoracula »

rpearl wrote: post #132
xp84 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not fashionable anymore, but I feel that Phabricator deserves an honorable mention as a self-hostable GH alternative too. Actually its “dated” UI is kind of a plus considering how bad everything is now.

It's not "unfashionable". Phabricator has been unmaintained since 2021.

There is Phorge which is a community fork.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#138

Post by ErroneousBosh »

rpearl wrote: post #132
xp84 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not fashionable anymore, but I feel that Phabricator deserves an honorable mention as a self-hostable GH alternative too. Actually its “dated” UI is kind of a plus considering how bad everything is now.

It's not "unfashionable". Phabricator has been unmaintained since 2021.

It seems that Phorge is the community-run fork of it that's still worked on.

Looks good!

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#139

Post by giwook »

jedberg wrote: post #97
giwook wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You missed my point.

Apparently so did everyone else. What was your point?

The comment I responded to said they felt bad for GH employees. I was saying I don't feel all that bad given they are well-compensated white collar workers (like many of us here).

Life is pretty good if one's biggest concern is work stuff and you're not personally in danger or actively being harmed. That's all I'm saying.

Re: Days without GitHub incidents

#140

Post by SpaceNoodled »

dpe82 wrote: post #100

I recently moved all my projects to a self-hosted forgejo instance and have found it quite satisfactory so far. And it's fast! If you're in the market for a github alternative, take a look - there are options.

I always balked at GitHub, but was impressed with git very soon after I was first introduced; I migrated from an old Gitea instance to Forgejo for my personal projects and have been very happy with it.
Post reply on HN