291–300 of 451 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not really a reasonable excuse considering this is completely broken for self hosted runners / paying customers (for a whole day).
But you’re not self-hosting the tasking service
This whole mess brought to like just now little moat there is left in the AI world. Like, everyone talks about how you can just prompt a new CRM instead of paying for Salesforce. But in this case, I raced with Fable and Sol and had time to build a full featured, fully functional CI/CD workflow system that has most of the features of GitHub actions (not the ecosystem obviously) and costs less than the GitHub runners p…
i can make a snickers bar at home in 30 minutes right now. what's stopping me from taking over mars inc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Azure DevOps (Also MS owned but more stable than GitHub), GitLab, Codeberg, etc.
More stable because its vastly less popular.
Now that the calculus has changed, I think we should start asking ourselves whether anyone has the right to unlimited free public repositories.
We can all agree that trying to attribute any single metric to repo quality is subject to Goodhart's Law[1] (e.g. what happened to GitHub stars) yet we can also agree that the Linux Project is a much more vital repository to keep public infrastructure availble for than say, someone's vibe-coded to-do app. Is it impossible then to make any quantitative distinction between these two? We can't have both an uncontrollable firehose of AI slop and unlimited free public storage/compute at the ready for it. I say we actually need to decide what software is worthy of using up these resources for free. We already have companies like JetBrains[2] using dynamic pricing for their products. It's time Github do the same. If you want a hosted VCS for vibe coded projects that aren't being used or depended upon widely, then host the repo yourself.
All of the outages make sense to me as scaling issues. Each month, GitHub is getting the amount of commits they’d normally get in a year. And it’s growing > Yup, platform activity is surging. There were 1 billion commits in 2025. Now, it's 275 million per week, on pace for 14 billion this year if growth remains linear (spoiler: it won't.) GitHub Actions has grown from 500M minutes/week in 2023 to 1B minutes/week in 2…
That’s no excuse. Particularly if it affects people self hosting their workers. These are folks that routinely make it a point to press on system design and scalability during interviews. Now they suddenly can’t scale or design systems but we should accept that?
For like 10 years the only feature development they did was by stealing ideas from GitLab. I wouldn't be shocked if little if none engineering discipline has took place at all during this time if it's this brittle to frequent change.
Guessing it was mostly held together with duct tape and poorly written tests/monitoring systems if any other corporate driven software.
We're really going to find out over the next few years which businesses have good practices or not.
All of the outages make sense to me as scaling issues. Each month, GitHub is getting the amount of commits they’d normally get in a year. And it’s growing > Yup, platform activity is surging. There were 1 billion commits in 2025. Now, it's 275 million per week, on pace for 14 billion this year if growth remains linear (spoiler: it won't.) GitHub Actions has grown from 500M minutes/week in 2023 to 1B minutes/week in 2…
That’s no excuse. Particularly if it affects people self hosting their workers. These are folks that routinely make it a point to press on system design and scalability during interviews. Now they suddenly can’t scale or design systems but we should accept that?
Even my own systems at home are burgeoning under the load of the my more ambitious hobby projects I'm doing for fun. I don't envy "we had to build five more datacenters to keep up with demand" class problems just from a how many people have to sign off on them perspective let alone the technical difficulty of doing so
I don't think this portents anything great for software in general. We're a good year+ into the use LLMs for all major bits of software that we all rely upon and GitHub here is down to one 9 of uptime. I've been using GitHub for a _long_ time, my first commits there go back to August 2009!, and I honestly don't recall GitHub going down as much as it has in the last year. I'm sure there's other things happening in the…
> We're a good year+ into the use LLMs for all major bits of software that we all rely upon and GitHub here is down to one 9 of uptime. With what to show for it? If GH did 10x in volume/git commits, it's all LLM sloppy-pasta. Where's the 10x productivity? Where are the amazing apps?
I don't think this portents anything great for software in general. We're a good year+ into the use LLMs for all major bits of software that we all rely upon and GitHub here is down to one 9 of uptime. I've been using GitHub for a _long_ time, my first commits there go back to August 2009!, and I honestly don't recall GitHub going down as much as it has in the last year. I'm sure there's other things happening in the…
For the longest time, I didn't appreciate the "AI-induced traffic" excuse. But seriously, I checked the rough github egress for our lab versus an old log from 2024, and there's an order of magnitude or two difference. From asking around, it seems people all have the gh cli tool and let it loose with parallel tool calls and e.g LLM's polling Actions in a background bash while loop with sleep $TOO_FEW_SECONDS. Some peo…
If your platform can't handle the use patterns of AI, then perhaps don't go around telling everyone to use AI for everything? It's a self-inflicted wound, you could also just not do this. Too bad Microsoft has bet its future on AI not being a giant bubble, huh?