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

GitHub down

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 198 posts

Re: GitHub down

#131

Post by jonbarker »

lykr0n wrote: post #111
bobcallme wrote: post #64

This is why it pays to host your own source repositories. It is kind of shocking that many people with the skills and means are too cheap to host their own. I personally could not risk github deleting my repositories or (in this case) going down for any length of time.

The problem is that if you spin up a GitLab in DO or Linode, there is a chance that your VM will get lost due to hardware failure. You also need to manage backups and stuff. I'm right there with you, but it doesn't make sense for small teams. Once you get past a point, it starts to make sense to self-host some stuff. Is there a managed hosting provider that would host all this stuff for you? Like, say "I need GitLab,…

You can select all of this in Azure. You can also enable availability sets to reduce hardware failure risk.

Re: GitHub down

#132

Post by kuon »

clon wrote: post #67
kuon wrote: post #46

It's been only 7 minutes and I already noticed it (outside of HN), we rely too much on github :P

It was 8 minutes and the stroy was already running in HN, checked it before status.github.com even. We rely too much on HN :P

I guess I'm going out for a walk in the park (without my phone), we rely too much on computers :P

Re: GitHub down

#133

Post by ehPReth »

rplnt wrote: post #74

While I kind of hate Atlassian products (bloated, horrible APIs), and Bitbucket has some serious UX problems (Find), it's still better than have your repos be offline. There's not much that can go wrong on a single instance with a local database. Have a failover in case the HW fails and you are good to go, and it's faster. The pricing is not great, but perhaps that's something GitLab can solve. But being hip and bein…

GitHub also has an enterprise version analogous (AIUI) to running Bitbucket or GitLab locally: https://enterprise.github.com/home

Re: GitHub down

#134

Post by [deleted] »

piaste wrote: post #86
bobcallme wrote: post #64

This is why it pays to host your own source repositories. It is kind of shocking that many people with the skills and means are too cheap to host their own. I personally could not risk github deleting my repositories or (in this case) going down for any length of time.

Though in an alternate universe where somebody's self-hosted server went down in flames (possibly literally), one could just as easily say: This is why it pays to have your own source repositories in the cloud. It is kind of shocking that many people with the awareness and means are too cheap to pay for a GitHub private repo. I personally could not risk a careless sysadmin deleting my repositories or (in this case) g…

[deleted]

Re: GitHub down

#135

Post by castis »

willejs wrote: post #22

It is only a matter of time before someone here suggests you use self hosted gitlab/github enterprise. Ain't got time for that.

Is it so absurd that some people would want a service they use on a daily basis to be stable?

Re: GitHub down

#136

Post by edraferi »

sdruskat wrote: post #101
drdaeman wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. We need a proper whitepaper explaining how to make GitHub decentralized with blockchain tokenization using distributed smart-contracts. ;) (Did I forget any important buzzword?)

It exist! Not a whitepaper, but at least a Medium article: https://medium.com/@alexberegszaszi/mango-git-completely-dec... . Ethereum + IPFS/Swarm as backend for Git. Source code is currently unavailable as it is hosted on ... drum roll ... GitHub: https://github.com/axic/mango .

Insufficient Dogfood.

Re: GitHub down

#137

Post by masklinn »

ReverseCold wrote: post #127
nezza-_- wrote: post #2

We centralized a decentralized version control system.

We centralized a decentralized communication system too. (eMail) Decentralization just doesn't work too well in practice for whatever reason. Everyone is behind a NAT/firewall, everyone has low computing power, its hard to regulate, etc. This all leads to a centralized solution being easier. I think the current best thing we have is centralized but open source and encrypted, which gets an "okay"/10 from me.

> Decentralization just doesn't work too well in practice for whatever reason.

Because it's inconvenient. Centralisation is convenient, it gives a single discovery and synchronisation point. Decentralisation makes discovery much more difficult, and requires adding separate synchronisation mechanisms. It generates friction and cognitive overhead.

Even more so for "side-services". Sure your VCS is nominally decentralised[0], but what about bug reports? Contributions? Notes & docs? There were distributed bug trackers efforts back in the early 10s but… they didn't really work IME, they were not convenient or practical.

[0] though even without a single giant point of failure, most project would still have a single canonical master copy, a really mesh/distributed contribution system is very rare (Linux's tree of integrators/forks is probably the closest?) and none of the current VCS makes mesh/point-to-point collaborations really convenient

Re: GitHub down

#138

Post by rom1v »

d4nyll wrote: post #75
scoot wrote: post #45

Apparently the status has been "red" every day since December 1st: https://status.github.com/messages/2017-12-07 "The status is still red at the beginning of the day" Yesterday was the first "normal" day, before this outage.

The status page is broken, it was mostly green 10 minutes ago.

They should provide a status page for the status page.

Re: GitHub down

#139

Post by ChristianBundy »

JohnStudio wrote: post #124
ezekg wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Blockchain is so 2017--block lattice is the future.

Actually that's the FIRST time I've ever heard of lattice. Is that a real deal? Not trying to feed into the hype here, but from a math perspective I get fascinated by concurrency

Yeah, RaiBlocks is currently the only one doing it, although you could make the case for Stellar as well.

Re: GitHub down

#140

Post by codazoda »

bobcallme wrote: post #64

This is why it pays to host your own source repositories. It is kind of shocking that many people with the skills and means are too cheap to host their own. I personally could not risk github deleting my repositories or (in this case) going down for any length of time.

I don't worry about Github deleting my stuff. Every single developer has a copy of all of the repos they work on. Delete it from Github and any one of us can just push it somewhere else. That's one of the great things about git.

Them going down is still a problem if you're using Github as part of your daily development or deployment process, of course.

Post reply on HN