131–140 of 231 posts
Does this matter much? Git is a ”distributed source control system”. Are you using git in the wrong way? :)
Unless you have some sort of decentralized method of doing CI/CD and pull requests I'm unaware of?
git was designed as a distributed vcs for high-latency connected developers with plenty of ability to work offline. I don't think I've really been impacted by any of the outages. Maybe I wait an extra hour to merge a feature or something, in which case I actually get to eat lunch and browse HN, doesn't feel quite as catastrophic for me, as some of you.
Nobody is preventing the devs from just setting up a second "upstream" and pushing to both github and gitlab (for example) or any other service at the same time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Agree, atlassian products are much worse in terms of reliability.
We use Jira. It's a horrendous product, but I cannot remember the last time it was down, unlike Github.
Most of the problems I hear about are micromanaging product managers. That's not the fault of the tool itself per-se.
Enterprise customers, remember to email your sales rep and ask for them to report on their contracted uptime with you that you are allowed to do as per contract. They wont do this unless you ask hoping you don't notice the outages. It creates lots of internal pain - they have no automation internally for reporting on this. This is the only way anything will ever change. GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS pro…
Still sounds like good advice though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any important feature from Gitlab you feel is missing? I personally think Gitlab has way more features than I need but maybe there are some important ones I would miss.
Running Gitlab in any kind of scale beyond a single server is a major PITA. And it's very poorly optimized.
GitLab is great, I really do enjoy working with it. I hate running it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS product. Some of us are stuck using Atlassian and BitBucket and it is by far worse in every way.
I used GitHub for years in the tech industry, then went into the games industry and used BitBucket and hated it, thought it was such a downgrade. Now I'm back in the tech industry and using GitHub, and I miss BitBucket.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS product. Some of us are stuck using Atlassian and BitBucket and it is by far worse in every way.
Amen, BitBucket outages are regular and showstopping. Self hosting is genuinely more reliable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Had to buy an IPv4 address for a VPS the other day in order to clone some git repositories. Couldn't believe it. Costing their customers money when they should be able to support v6 by now.
What VPS are you using that doesn't come with both IPv4 and IPv6?
The cloud is someone else’s computer. I wonder if self hosting is more reliable. How much does a private and firewalled git* instance need updates?
If you want to self-host for more features (CI/CD, PRs, etc.) there's GitLab, Gitea, and forgejo that I'm aware of. I think GitLab is a bit heavy duty for most self-hosting usage myself though. I actually appreciate the online/cloud and commercial options.
When you self-host, it becomes your job to fix it when it breaks.