391–400 of 407 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Self host gitlab. If you already host runners it’s not a big lift.
Even if there is features that are similar, most of gitlabs features are for paying customers only.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The unofficial and offical charts are both lying. The GitHub one ignores actual outages and the unofficial ones count minor display bugs in minor features as a “github outage”.
The unofficial one has done that for years though so it’s useful for comparison. If you go back a few years it was regularly at 99.9% uptime.
When I dug in to the latest outages, they were almost all in small newer, features like all the AI stuff. The actual core GitHub platform seems much more stable than the unofficial uptime trackers propose.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's an eye opener. Think about it - today, it was a mistake. But, what if it really happened? What if you really lost access to all your years of hard work? It's a wake up call. A blessing in disguise to store what matters to you the most locally, backed up offline. Never trust any single provider. Be it MS or Google or Apple. RAID is the way.
Well yes, my git repositories sit on my laptop, that's the entire point. If github banned my country because its president has a tis, I can push my entire commit history to another company. Same with anyone else who's working on it. It would be a pain as I'd have to set up a few integrations again, but github is far lower down the risk scale than the vast majority of SAAS providers
I hope people here are aware that you can push your repo somewhere else if wanted.
Git is a distributed system, there isn't even a server, only other git repo instances that are remote.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I recently got my GitHub account suspended for 4 months. When it was finally reinstated, their support just said it was a "mistake". Proudly self-hosting Forgejo since then.
This happened to me as well—thankfully not my personal account that I use for work, but the organization associated with an open source project I worked on was suspended. It similarly took 2 months for GitHub to restore the organization. > Our team is currently experiencing an unexpectedly high volume of tickets which has resulted in longer response times than we prefer. We acknowledge the long wait and apologize for…
Too many times we've been bitten by this - it has been an issue too many times to count. This is why we don't use Github Actions, kids. Seriously, its a proprietary build service that puts the keys to the kingdom in someone elses' control. Just: No! Print this status page to PDF so you've got it handy next time someone castigates you for not using Github Actions, folks.
So, what do you use?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well yes, my git repositories sit on my laptop, that's the entire point. If github banned my country because its president has a tis, I can push my entire commit history to another company. Same with anyone else who's working on it. It would be a pain as I'd have to set up a few integrations again, but github is far lower down the risk scale than the vast majority of SAAS providers
They rely on GitHub actions, not the repository itself. I hope people here are aware that you can push your repo somewhere else if wanted. Git is a distributed system, there isn't even a server, only other git repo instances that are remote.
It will be a hassle to migrate to another platform, possibly a couple of hours work to do the 25 repos in my ~/git/ directory.
Even highly complicated actions can be migrated quite easily -- the source is stored in .github/workflows/blah.yml
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The unofficial one has done that for years though so it’s useful for comparison. If you go back a few years it was regularly at 99.9% uptime.
Just vibes wise, before Microsoft acquired GitHub, they added almost no features on a regular basis. These days they are adding tons of stuff every month. When I dug in to the latest outages, they were almost all in small newer, features like all the AI stuff. The actual core GitHub platform seems much more stable than the unofficial uptime trackers propose.
There’s also this blurb from a story on HN the other day that supports what I’m seeing.
“ I've felt this way for a long time, but for the past month I've kept a journal where I put an "X" next to every date where a GitHub outage has negatively impacted my ability to work2. Almost every day has an X. On the day I am writing this post, I've been unable to do any PR review for ~2 hours because there is a GitHub Actions outage3. This is no longer a place for serious work if it just blocks you out for hours per day, every day.”
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Github has had horrible uptime for years, before agentic use was a thing. The killer was Microsoft.
It had uptime issues before Microsoft. They just got better at tracking and reporting after Microsoft.
Is this your argument?