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

GitHub was having issues

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 231 posts

Re: GitHub was having issues

#191

Post by pmontra »

petcat wrote: post #70
everfrustrated wrote: post #42

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…

> 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.

Two customers of mine have been using Bitbucket and other Atlassian products. I remember a problem a few months ago, nothing else. Maybe I've been lucky, no accesses during the outages.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#192

Post by gethly »

clintonb wrote: post #63
gethly wrote: post #58

I've always used Bitbucket as it allows private repositories, so Github was never something I wanted to use. But it is one of the most important websites in the world for tech people and should be run better than this, especially being now owned by the largest tech company in the world. On the other hand, it just shows that centralisation, or over-reliance on one thing or service, is always the worst idea. But people…

Do you mean free private repos? GitHub has allowed free private repos for a few years now.

I have been using bitbucket before it got acquired by atlassian, which was in 2010, so i am sure github changed quite a bit since then. Even though i do have a github account, i don't use it for anything else other than creating or commenting on issues for other repos. So i have no clue about present day github capabilities as i am satisfied with bitbucket and had no need to explore github in depth.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#193

Post by Analemma_ »

FredPret wrote: post #162
lesuorac wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starting to pretty much desire tools that can do nothing but are just fast at their core competency. Looking at PRs in github and then when toggling to the "files" tab it chocking up or being like "I don't want to display this file because its more than 100 lines" is like wtf you're whole point is to show me modified files.

Like the Unix philosophy, but for businesses. Come to think of it, this might be great advice for life in general: do one thing very well, and be modular (aka play well with others)

I wish the world worked this way, but I don't think it does, especially in tech. If you "do one thing well", the cloud hyperscalers will use their billions to copy whatever that is, and add your "one good thing" into their bundled subscriptions or cloud plans. At which point, any rational CTO will go "why should we pay for this, when we're already getting it via AWS/O365/whatever, and with better integration with our existing tooling to boot?"

I don't think "do one thing well" can succeed in this world, which is why Atlassian, Dropbox, etc. keep on launching things like office suites even though that makes no sense considering their core competencies. It's the only way not be streamrolled by FAANG.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#194

Post by keybored »

metalliqaz wrote: post #95
meepmorp wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's kind of weird that we've collectively decided on a distributed version control system, while centralizing where we keep the repositories and metadata.

I think it's just a simple reality that most projects don't actually need or want a decentralized development process. In my experience, most projects are looking for a single, high-reliability canonical source that is in control of project leadership. Most projects are only developed by a small group, maybe even only one person.

^ Comment on the Nth 100+ GitHub Down thread (every thread is like that).

Maybe everyone here is just using it as an excuse to chatter about forges or GitHub being down too much etc. and it has no impact. But if it does and people are honestly fretting they can mirror their repos. Then no one needs to worry that much (except for their cursed CI setups) the next time it happens.

And that’s a benefit of peer-to-peer repos right there.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#195

Post by keybored »

meepmorp wrote: post #110
metalliqaz wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's just a simple reality that most projects don't actually need or want a decentralized development process. In my experience, most projects are looking for a single, high-reliability canonical source that is in control of project leadership. Most projects are only developed by a small group, maybe even only one person.

Yeah, I think what people really liked about git (vs many other VCSs at the time) was cheap and easy local branching, not the distributed nature.

Local and distributed is the same difference to me compared to subversion.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#197

Post by jorams »

dehrmann wrote: post #167
e3bc54b2 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hetzner charges extra for IPv4 address, as I believe most of them do. I know because I went through the same crap.

It seems more like a weird Hetzner thing that they won't give you a IPv4 NAT gateway.

They charge €0.50 per month to add an IPv4 address. A shared IPv4 NAT gateway introduces a whole lot of problems for them just to support customers who need IPv4 but don't want to pay a tiny amount for it.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#198

Post by phlakaton »

krs_ wrote: post #152
nickitolas wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is games not a part of tech?

Of course, but there are some oddities in tool use compared to other industries. At my job we use Perforce for version control for example, which I think is more common in the game industry than other solutions for whatever reason. Naturally everyone here hates it.

But not everybody here has to try and manage many GB or even TB of assets in their VCS. I wager game company build/dev engineers know what they are doing in picking Perforce.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#199

Post by WhyNotHugo »

jeltz wrote: post #59
dzogchen wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Much simpler. Much less features. Completely open source and not only the core.

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.

I deal with GitLab a lot. Both the official instance and third party instances.

It drives me crazy how slow it is. A lot of operations take minutes. Eg: I push commits to a branch and open an MR. During 2-3 minutes, the MR will indicate that no changes were found. When I push new changes, it can also take minutes or update, so I can’t quickly check that it all looks correct.

The latest release changed their issues UI, so when you try to open an issue, it’s opened on a floating panel on the right 30% of the screen. I’ve no idea what exotic use case this addresses, but when I click a link, just open it. The browser does it find. No need to reinvent navigation like this. Now to open an issue, I need to wait for this slow floating UI to load before I can _actually_ navigate to the page. Which will also be extremely slow.

Don’t even get me started on the UI. Buttons are hidden all over the place. Obvious links are behind obscure abstract menus. At this point, I remember where all the basic stuff is, but I can understand why newcomers struggle so much.

Hosting GitLab is also really resource intensive. For a small team of 2-3 people, I don’t think you can get away with “just” 8GB of ram.

—-

I do have to admit, GitLab CI is pretty good, assuming that you’re fine with just Docker support and don’t need to support BSD or some exotic platforms.

Re: GitHub was having issues

#200

Post by kirici »

lesuorac wrote: post #157
zemo wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Starting to pretty much desire tools that can do nothing but are just fast at their core competency. Looking at PRs in github and then when toggling to the "files" tab it chocking up or being like "I don't want to display this file because its more than 100 lines" is like wtf you're whole point is to show me modified files.

I am increasingly in favor of inspecting/diffing branches from MRs locally.
Post reply on HN