141–150 of 206 posts
It's a nice way of putting it.
I'm trying to run github action for couple of hours now. They don't work at all. But apparently this means they run, but in infinite time, hence == degraded performance, nice.
https://www.githubstatus.com/history 21 incident outages in just 3 months. At this rate the benefits of running your own gitea or gitlab are starting to become competitive.
Excluding ones reported as [Errors], [Scheduled] or [Notifications] 2019 -> 39 Incidents 2020 -> 67 Incidents 2021 -> 86 Incidents 2022 -> 20 Incidents so far Edit: Using Linear Regression...Prediction for total end 2022: 111 Incidents.
So perhaps they are not exactly improving, but maybe there is some other way to normalize the data.
[1] https://github.blog/2019-11-06-the-state-of-the-octoverse-20...
https://www.githubstatus.com/history 21 incident outages in just 3 months. At this rate the benefits of running your own gitea or gitlab are starting to become competitive.
But how many of those actually affected you? For example, no amount of issues around codespaces or github packages would impact my professional use of github, so whether there are 21 or 5000 or those parts get permanently taken offline makes no difference in what I need out of the platform. How many core incidents? The part that affects whether you can even push to and pull from a repo, and access issues and PRs? Bec…
If I can get all the Github features I had as of ~2020, but on an instance that wont get hit by the public cloud/update bus, I would be exceptionally happy.
The only complaints we have are regarding availability. If we can fix that one problem, this is a perfect product in our view.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But who can host a website? I would be wary of hosting something that isn’t a 100% static site, out of fear of the amount of attention maintenance would take. Also, quite a few of the non-profits behind the projects you mentioned have multi-million dollar budgets that they can use to administer their git instance, if needed. I don’t think “if they can do it, you can” is a strong argument for those.
I don't recall ReactOS, or the creators of wireguard having 'multi million dollar budgets' . How is it that even projects like RedoxOS [0] are able to self-host on a GitLab instance using a subdomain, without giant budgets in the millions? You don't need a 'multi-million dollar budget' to self-host a git repo and may of these open-source projects have been doing so even before GitHub existed for years. Even if they d…
I never made that claim. The argument was “if X can do it, so can you”.
I pointed out that _some_of_these_ (Mozilla, likely the most extreme of them, had over $400 million in revenues in 2020), are quite different from the typical ‘you’, invalidating that argument.
As always, invalidating an argument doesn’t mean its conclusion is wrong.
We are scheduling a call with an enterprise sales person next week. If I can get all the Github features I had as of ~2020, but on an instance that wont get hit by the public cloud/update bus, I would be exceptionally happy. The only complaints we have are regarding availability. If we can fix that one problem, this is a perfect product in our view.
https://www.githubstatus.com/history 21 incident outages in just 3 months. At this rate the benefits of running your own gitea or gitlab are starting to become competitive.
I’m not sure at what organization that is true. My company lives out of GitHub and Jira and I’ve hardly noticed the three month surge. GitHub would have to do a lot worse to get many companies to want to host their own services. This is the argument people have said about the cloud from day one. People want to know it isn’t their problem, that makes cloud computing (and things like GitHub) worth their weight in gold.…
This has been my experience as well. I don't know if that means GitHub is being overly transparent about issues or I've just been lucky but I would hate if people punished services for being transparent and informative on their status pages.