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

Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 221 posts

Re: Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

#121

Post by pocksuppet »

cedws wrote: post #95
SteveNuts wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Java or Bedrock edition, and have you tried logging into your EntraID Microsoft Teams for Xbox account lately? Make sure to check the box to keep you logged in!

Last I heard UK Minecraft players aren't even allowed to talk anymore without ID verification.

And if someone makes a server that doesn't do the chat verification, Microsoft blacklists that server in the client-side server address textbox. This system was developed to destroy pay-to-win servers, but they're now applying it against servers that refuse to censor "fuck".

Re: Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

#122

Post by pocksuppet »

darkamaul wrote: post #39
pluc wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Name one thing Microsoft didn't run into the ground post-acquisition

I think Minecraft is still in good shape

It's been nonstop content-slop since the acquisition. New mobs, new blocks, new items, new blocks, new items, new mobs, new mobs, new biomes. Some of them are good but the totality of adding a bunch of stuff has been to destroy the simplicity that was one of the draws of the original game. Now it's an exploration and niche-mechanics-exploitation game more than a virtual legos game. You don't go mining any more, you find trading loops with villagers.

This was happening to some degree pre-acquisition, but since the acquisition it's been this non-stop.

Some of it's good. The Nether and the oceans were really boring before their respective updates.

They should have called Minecraft "done" around the acquisition time and started on Minecraft 2.

Re: Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

#124

Post by pocksuppet »

rvz wrote: post #26
gen220 wrote: post #6

https://isgithubcooked.com Normally I defend GH in the comments of these incidents but it’s been an impressively bad month by their standards, even when you filter for critical components filter out sev-2’s and 3’s.

They are already cooked as this has been happening ever since the Microsoft acquisition and it was run to the ground before 2023. At this point you would get better uptime by just self-hosting your own GitLab, Forgejo or Codeberg instance instead of dealing with Github's unreliablity. There is no defending them with their clear neglet and carelessness of the platform.

If all you need is a repository, you don't even need any of these. You need SSH access to a server, and optionally, one of several web front-ends. Git comes with a CGI script that handles public anonymous checkouts via HTTP(S), although since nginx doesn't support CGI, integrating those is a little bit tricky as you need a FastCGI wrapper.

Re: Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

#125

Post by pocksuppet »

shevy-java wrote: post #123

I think it is time to decouple GitHub from Microsoft. Microsoft has shown irresponsible behaviour - and this continues. They keep on going at it until nothing works anymore. Typical microslop work.

You don't get to control that. It is Microsoft's right to do whatever it wants with GitHub - it could shut down tomorrow, or demand face ID. If you want to control what happens with a thing, you have to make the thing instead of letting someone else make the thing and sell it to Microsoft.

Your choice is to accept the product that exists on the market, switch to another product that exists on the market (such as Codeberg or self-hosted Forgejo), make your own product, or not use any.

Re: Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

#126

Post by maxfurman »

varun_ch wrote: post #60
ramon156 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Self-hosting forgejo under tailscale + mirroring public repos through GitHub Has worked wonders for me :)

Forgejo is fantastic. I do think it could use a fresh coat of paint from a designer but it’s otherwise really good. Gitea (what Forgejo forked from) recently stole the sidebar on repos from GitHub and I think that would be great for Forgejo to steal too… Forgejo themed by Codeberg: https://codeberg.org/forgejo/forgejo (the codeberg theme is extremely low contrast) Forgejo default: https://v15.next.forgejo.org/pparaxa…

That Blender Gitea theme is really nice! I wonder why exactly it's so much easier on the eyes? In a lot of ways all of these are "just Github" with minor changes, so the one that is actually better really stands out.

Re: Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

#127

Post by gen220 »

btown wrote: post #93
gen220 wrote: post #6

https://isgithubcooked.com Normally I defend GH in the comments of these incidents but it’s been an impressively bad month by their standards, even when you filter for critical components filter out sev-2’s and 3’s.

Is the “streak” days of continuous uptime, or of days with at least one downtime incident? I think it’s the latter :]

It's a streak for continuous uptime, and yeah it is fairly depressing to imagine overseeing that :/

Re: Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

#129

Post by hbn »

EduardoBautista wrote: post #9
gen220 wrote: post #6

https://isgithubcooked.com Normally I defend GH in the comments of these incidents but it’s been an impressively bad month by their standards, even when you filter for critical components filter out sev-2’s and 3’s.

May has been filled with critical issues. It seems it's getting worse over time.

Commits are up 14x year-over-year

https://x.com/kdaigle/status/2040164759836778878

Re: Incident with Pull Requests, Issues, Git Operations and API Requests

#130

Post by tom1337 »

hbn wrote: post #129
EduardoBautista wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May has been filled with critical issues. It seems it's getting worse over time.

Commits are up 14x year-over-year https://x.com/kdaigle/status/2040164759836778878

Yea but thats not really an excuse, is it? They offer a service, (some) people pay for that service and should therefore expect it to work. If GitHub cannot keep up with the growth then they could disable new account registrations or start reducing free tiers so people either use the free tier more mindfully or need to pay for usage-base products like Actions which would GitHub allow to scale.
Post reply on HN