Can anyone shed some light why GitHub is having so many problems lately?
The CTO discussed it a few months back: https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/addressing-gi...
Incident with Github.com [resolved]
321–330 of 1001 posts
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#322I had a lot of goodwill for GitHub but I think today is the tipping point. Looking at a unicorn page, I feel this lingering hope that it's transient (like it usually was in the old days) but my mind reassures me it's probably going to be a long full outage again. The hope is dead.
I’m willing to give them a break as I’m assuming they have a lot of scaling problems due to the influx of LLM assisted coding. But maybe I’m wrong?
How many weeks/months can they use this excuse? They are literally are at the forefront of this emerging industry and are capturing untold value. To let their product suffer and potentially lose market share because of it is extremely foolish
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#323The LLM code influx is not the problem. Microsoft mismanagement is: https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/
GitHub's historical uptime page is fake, they backfilled it with 100% uptime going back to 1996: https://www.githubstatus.com/uptime?page=200
seems to be correct. there's no record of the outage on 8/13 :/
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#324To everyone who is angry: calm down. Github’s servers are constantly on fire as their usage increased something like 50x due to LLM sloppers pushing large amounts of trash code Unless you have a emergency hotfix (you don’t), go hit the gym or walk outside. If a work tool going down triggers you enough mentally to start angrily ranting online, it’s a sign you need to chill out and focus more on your health
GH shouldn't have promoted LLM usage the way they have if they didn't have the infrastructure to support it. Regardless of how you feel about the code quality (which you have zero evidence of), if GH has made commitments to supporting broad LLM usage, they need to back that up with the proper hardware and without whatever fragile SDLC processes they have.
> GH shouldn't have promoted LLM usage the way they have
No qualifiers necessary. But try arguing with a lawnmower...
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#325To everyone who is angry: calm down. Github’s servers are constantly on fire as their usage increased something like 50x due to LLM sloppers pushing large amounts of trash code Unless you have a emergency hotfix (you don’t), go hit the gym or walk outside. If a work tool going down triggers you enough mentally to start angrily ranting online, it’s a sign you need to chill out and focus more on your health
FYI this is an argument to not use Github, not an argument to use it.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#326tenth per day, I almost think my network is noet working.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#327To everyone who is angry: calm down. Github’s servers are constantly on fire as their usage increased something like 50x due to LLM sloppers pushing large amounts of trash code Unless you have a emergency hotfix (you don’t), go hit the gym or walk outside. If a work tool going down triggers you enough mentally to start angrily ranting online, it’s a sign you need to chill out and focus more on your health
> Github’s servers are constantly on fire as their usage increased something like 50x due to LLM sloppers pushing large amounts of trash code Which means they have a pricing problem. Rate limit non-paying users.
Just take away free Actions and it would surely solve a lot of their scale issues.
It's absurd that I have dozens of repos, many with GH Actions that run CI, test and then package and push to prod/package managers, and haven't paid GH anything.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
For the amount of money enterprises are paying to GitHub, there is a reasonable (and contractual) expectation of uptime. I don't think my boss would find it to fun if I bailed work to hit the gym just because GitHub was down.
Yes, but GitHub enterprise has different uptime ( https://us.githubstatus.com/posts/dashboard ) and actually does have an SLA. Edit: it seems GHE is also affected by the outage and isn't much better.
Since upgrading to Cloud Enterprise... why didn't my GH uptime get any better?
Guess on-prem GHE server is the only way to do that.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#329Earlier quoted context omitted.
Luckily we already have a distributed version control system that can take over github: https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/index.wiki I suppose people can use git too if they ever figure out how to send emails from a dedicated client.
There are plenty of alternatives for git hosting. The last thing which needs to be migrated before we get an exodus off this vibe coded monstrosity is reputation (i.e. github stars) which are inherently sticky.
Github stars are a metric of what?
If I build something that satisfies me and say 100 users (who all star me) does that really say anything. Are those 100 stars even "real" any more?
All the old problems of the web are new again, and still remain unsolved.
Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]
#330This is starting to feel like Twitter. For a variety of reasons, we had a centralized place where everyone of a particular set of persuasions could connect, and this had outsize benefits for the community as a whole. That place is becoming untenable, and with the loss of goodwill and stability, the community’s started to dissipate. But there isn’t one obvious transition candidate, so the diaspora is finding itself sp…
It is, but a single point of failure is itself also an unstable equilibrium, given that a lot of things have to continuously go right for its continued existence in terms of governance of all kinds (technical, moderation policies, commercial/pricing etc.)