Live data from Hacker News

Incident with Github.com [resolved]

githubstatus.com

441–450 of 1001 posts

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#441

It is not working at all, I can not load any repo pages. Github.com's promise is that it can be the central broker of open source code because it is reliable. That promise hasn't been kept recently. That said, Github is hard to displace and it is similar to the era of the Twitter Fail Whales. It was a sign of growth that couldn't be properly managed but there was not viable alternative.

github replaced sourceforge, so something or things can at least offset github

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#442

We're starting to have the conversation of "do we need to replace GitHub as our CI/CD pipeline?" No idea if/when we decide to pull that bandaid but I think once we can't merge a hot fix into main because of GH being down, it'll be a big org push to replace it. What's everyone else using? Self hosted Gitlab? Gitea?

ultimately, folks need to stop writing massive YAML files to define their builds. CI should schedule jobs, your build system should define them. my workflow files look like this:

      steps:
          name: Do the thing
           run: nix build .#
at any point, if my CI is down or i need to switch or i need to run builds locally, i can do so trivially.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#444
I wonder if you could replace the whole github issues feature with just a directory within each git repo named "Issues/". Within that, have another couple directories, "open/", and "closed/". Within "open", have a directory per issue, e.g. "such-and-such-does-not-work/". Within each issue directory, have "issue.txt", or "issue.md", which takes the place of the page for each issue on github. You could store other things in the issue directory which "issue.md" could reference, e.g. screen shots, logs, whatever. When an issue is closed, it gets git mv'ed to "closed/". You want to see a list of open issues sorted by time? Just "ls -ltr Issues/open". Want to see open issues related to the frakfrobber? "grep -i frakfrobber Issues/open/*". Add a comment to an issue? "vim Issues/open/my-issue/issue.md; git add !$; git commit -m 'Updated my-issue';" It would move the entire issues subsystem back under control of bare "git" and make it portable. Undoubtedly, I am not the first to think of such a thing.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#445

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the amount of money enterprises are paying to GitHub, there is a reasonable (and contractual) expectation of uptime. I don't think my boss would find it to fun if I bailed work to hit the gym just because GitHub was down.

Yes, but GitHub enterprise has different uptime ( https://us.githubstatus.com/posts/dashboard ) and actually does have an SLA. Edit: it seems GHE is also affected by the outage and isn't much better.

Yeah, I know, and it's down.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#446

Never quite understood why large enterprises use github as core infrastructure. Sure use it to collab externally, use it if you can't justify running your own infrastructure, but why are large companies choosing to place code externally - which is one secret leak away from compromise?

Pass the buck. There's no one to blame but yourself if you're self-hosting.

"Yeah we're unable to offer services, but so is [X BIG CORP] and [Y BIG CORP]. It's an industry outage, nothing we can do!"

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#447
GitHub is too important to fail, and they obviously can't fix their up-time problem. Shouldn't they open-source core and/or problematic components and ask for public to fix it? this is not sustainable. It's literally blocking development/productivity worldwide.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#450

We're starting to have the conversation of "do we need to replace GitHub as our CI/CD pipeline?" No idea if/when we decide to pull that bandaid but I think once we can't merge a hot fix into main because of GH being down, it'll be a big org push to replace it. What's everyone else using? Self hosted Gitlab? Gitea?

ultimately, folks need to stop writing massive YAML files to define their builds. CI should schedule jobs, your build system should define them. my workflow files look like this: steps: name: Do the thing run: nix build .# at any point, if my CI is down or i need to switch or i need to run builds locally, i can do so trivially.

NixCI does this but with a built-in cache ;) https://nix-ci.com/comparison/github-actions
Post reply on HN