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

Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

resources.github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–320 of 853 posts

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#311

Post by clintonb »

suryao wrote: post #143
clintonb wrote: post #8

Yikes! They seem to be gunning for services like WarpBuild, which we've used for a couple years to keep our costs low. The $0.002 per minute on top of WarpBuild's costs is exactly GitHub's new pricing scheme. I'm happy for competition, but this seems a bit foul since we users aren't getting anything tangible beyond the promise of improvements and investments that I don't need.

The lever that matters the most with the new $0.002/min tax is to reduce the number of minutes consumed. Given that GitHub runners are still slow as ever, it actually is a point in our favor even compared to self-hosting on aws etc. However, it makes the value harder to communicate .

Thanks for the email and the reminder that we can use fewer shards with larger runners.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#312

Post by dilyevsky »

agartner wrote: post #17

I guess it was only a matter of time... Part of this is fair since there is a cost to operating the control plane. One way around this is to go back to using check runs. I imagine a third party could handle webhooks, parse the .github/workflows/example.yml, then execute the action via https://github.com/nektos/act (or similar), then post the result.

inb4 "our webhooks are now 2c per call"

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#315

Post by some_furry »

matthewmacleod wrote: post #286
some_furry wrote: post #216

Oh great. I finally get used to GitHub Actions after Travis CI shat the bed, and now I have to find something else. Thanks, enshittification.

What part of this is “enshittification”? It’s just a company starting to charge for a formerly free service. Hardly seems like that aggressive a move.

From https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-platforms-cory-doctorow/

"Here is how platforms die: First, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die."

We are on step 2: then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#316

Post by gaigalas »

falsedan wrote: post #278
gaigalas wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I develop software, I also test and run it. All in my machines. But you (yes, you personally) have to collect the results and publish them to a webpage for me. For free. Would you make this deal?

if you were paying me a monthly license fee for each developer working on your repos, I'd probably consider it

What happens if I am, and now my developers suddenly start to produce changes much faster? Like, one developer now produces the volume of five.

Would you keep charging the same rate per head?

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#318

Post by tetha »

golovast wrote: post #131

I got contacted by our rep a couple weeks ago, who informed me of this news. I thought it was a disaster and it really pissed me off. The rep couldn't even explain the reasoning well. It basically summed up to "because we can" and "where are you going to go?". He was shocked to find out that I didn't like it. We currently self-host on kubernets/aws. The thing that really got to me isn't the new charge per se. It's th…

This kinda change also has some different gears turning in my head. At $0.002 / build-minute, some of our large software integration tests would cost us around 15 - 20 cents. Some of our ansible integration tests would be 5 - 10 cents - and we run like 50 - 100 of those per day. Some deployments might cost us a cent or two.

Apples to oranges, naturally, but like this, our infra-jenkins master would pay for itself in hosting in a week of ansible integration testing compared to what GHA would cost. Sure, maintenance is a thing, but honestly, flinging java, docker and a few other things onto a build agent isn't the time-consuming part of maintaining CI infrastructure.

And I mean sure, everything is kinda janky on Jenkins, but everything falls into an expectable corridor of jank you get used to.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#319

Post by hugs »

featherless wrote: post #265
larkost wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GitHub has still been managing the orchestration and monitoring of runs that you run on your own (or other cloud) hardware. They have just decided that they are no longer going to do this for free. So the question becomes: is $0.002/minute a good price for this. I have never run GitHub Actions, so I am going to assume that experience on other, similar, systems applies. So if your job takes an hour to build and run th…

As a solo Founder who recently invested in self-hosted build infrastructure because my company runs ~70,000 minutes/month, this change is going to add an extra $140/month for hardware I own . And that's just today; this number will only go up over time. I am not open to GitHub extracting usage-based rent for me using my own hardware. This is the first time in my 15+ years of using GitHub that I'm seriously evaluating…

feels like a new generation is learning what life is like when microsoft has a lot of power. (tl;dr: they try to use it.)

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#320

Post by justincormack »

CafeRacer wrote: post #298
perbu wrote: post #274

The reason this makes sense, at least for Github, is because the only valid reason to run your own action runners is compliance. And if you are doing it for compliance, price doesn't really matter. You don't really have a choice. If you've been running your runners on your own infra for cost reasons, you're not really that interesting to the Github business.

I needed arm64 workers, because x86 would take ~25 minutes to do a build.

They have these now.
Post reply on HN