i dont even know why people not using alternatives like gitlawb
Incident with Github.com [resolved]
241–250 of 1001 posts
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#242I don't understand why Github hasn't solved this problem with pricing updates. My understanding is they are getting hammered with LLM generated code growing their traffic by over an order of magnitude. So why not rate limit non-paying users and charge for whatever scarce resource is being consumed that is causing them to constantly fall-over? This seems like a basic economics problem.
They would benefit from a HackerNews-esque karma system.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#243This is starting to feel like Twitter. For a variety of reasons, we had a centralized place where everyone of a particular set of persuasions could connect, and this had outsize benefits for the community as a whole. That place is becoming untenable, and with the loss of goodwill and stability, the community’s started to dissipate. But there isn’t one obvious transition candidate, so the diaspora is finding itself sp…
Twitter is unstable? I can't remember the last time it had an outage.
I think they may mean Twitter's 'Fail Whale' era – late 2000s/early 2010s, when it regularly fell over under load.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#244I'm self-hosting Gitea and Woodpecker CI for least 6 years, alongside my own docker and pypi registries. Adding x86 and ARM runners, it costs me circa $30/month to run the whole thing, and I am reasonably sure that I could make the whole thing scale at a lower cost per user than what Github charges. I am seriously, 100%, contemplating the idea of offering consulting for migrating companies and projects out of Github.…
Sounds interesting but I'm just going to do the same thing as you (self host).
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#245Why haven't we all moved off GitHub yet? Or let me ask a more useful question: if we were to move, then to where? Ideally somewhere new (not Gitlab)
For us the uptime issues have been annoying but not consequential enough to justify the work / risk of moving.
I suspect even poor uptime for many services is a cosmetic problem for most users.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#246I have one client that relies on github. Just one, out of dozens I've worked with over the years.
It's just a constant pain in the ass.
Wherever I have anything to say I prefer ANY other gitforge over this piece of shit.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#247I've actually started loving GitHub down days because it means I get to spend time migrating away from them! (moving to self hosted Gitea)
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#248To everyone who is angry: calm down. Github’s servers are constantly on fire as their usage increased something like 50x due to LLM sloppers pushing large amounts of trash code Unless you have a emergency hotfix (you don’t), go hit the gym or walk outside. If a work tool going down triggers you enough mentally to start angrily ranting online, it’s a sign you need to chill out and focus more on your health
GH shouldn't have promoted LLM usage the way they have if they didn't have the infrastructure to support it. Regardless of how you feel about the code quality (which you have zero evidence of), if GH has made commitments to supporting broad LLM usage, they need to back that up with the proper hardware and without whatever fragile SDLC processes they have.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#249Earlier quoted context omitted.
20%, do we just make numbers up?
It seems vastly higher on every region and VPN I've tested, so I think this is a case of the "technicalies". It is technically 20%, because a bunch of the requests that happen on page load do succeed. Just not the few crucial ones that are required for the page to load correctly - those return a 500 the vast supermajority of the time.
Feel free to disregard this because ultimately its a tangent that doesn't matter; but supermajority is specifically a political term referring to the required threshold to advance legislation when simple majority isn't procedurally enough. It doesn't mean simply a greater share of.a majority
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#250This is starting to feel like Twitter. For a variety of reasons, we had a centralized place where everyone of a particular set of persuasions could connect, and this had outsize benefits for the community as a whole. That place is becoming untenable, and with the loss of goodwill and stability, the community’s started to dissipate. But there isn’t one obvious transition candidate, so the diaspora is finding itself sp…
Luckily we already have a distributed version control system that can take over github: https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki I suppose people can use git too if they ever figure out how to send emails from a dedicated client.
There are plenty of alternatives for git hosting. The last thing which needs to be migrated before we get an exodus off this vibe coded monstrosity is reputation (i.e. github stars) which are inherently sticky.