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

Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

status.bitbucket.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#41

Post by tyingq »

rightos wrote: post #25
ericfrederich wrote: post #11

I've said it before and I'll say it again... It makes zero sense to centralize something that was meant to be decentralized. We need issues, pull requests, comments, milestones, wiki, etc... all to be decentralized. No reason this stuff cannot be modeled using existing Git objects. GitHub, GitLab and BitBucket are extremely similar. Almost 100% overlap, you could use the lowest common denominator between the 3 and yo…

> We need issues, pull requests, comments, milestones, wiki, etc... all to be decentralized. No reason this stuff cannot be modeled using existing Git objects. https://www.fossil-scm.org/ pretty much does this.

That is pretty interesting and does model those things in the same data store. But the data store isn't git objects, as far as I can tell...

"Fossil stores its objects in a relational (SQLite) database file"

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#42

Post by zmb_ »

rsp1984 wrote: post #19

Great. I need to push some stuff real soon now. In the last 12 months Bitbucket had an uncomfortably high number of issues. But whenever I think about moving our company code to GitLab or GitHub I envision going into a world of pain with my eng. team. Has anyone got some advice for pain-free migration to GitLab or GitHub?

Git isn't centralized so there is no need to "move" the code. You can use Bitbucket, GitLab and GitHub all at the same time -- just add multiple remotes, I do this as a part of my normal setup. You can even pull directly between developer machines without the need for any centralized repository. The tricky part is all the tooling around the code (issues, wikis, CI, etc.), but no matter which provider you use for it, they will have downtime.

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#43

Post by yebyen »

LeifCarrotson wrote: post #20
exikyut wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't access bitbucket.org, so... Edit: / works, repos don't

What does work is git clone https://username@bitbucket.org/organization/repo.git so you can probably still get by. Just the website is down.

This doesn't work for me. (Edit: and, it's moot now, because it seems to be coming back up!)

I also have 2fa enabled (it's a private team) and my repo is private... I do seem to reach the repo, and it tells me I'll need an app-specific password to proceed.

Too bad the interface to create one is down.

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#44

Post by [deleted] »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #24
hobofan wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No reason this stuff cannot be modeled using existing Git objects. That's the easy part. The hard part is discovery and keeping stuff like teams and moderation when you decentralize it. Advancements in Blockchain-tech, IPFS and similar will make this viable soonish-ly, but I think we are not quite there yet from a technological standpoint.

How is blockchain related to this?

[deleted]

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#46

Post by beberlei »

gurelkaynak wrote: post #36

Now that sysadmin guy who told me: "what happens when bitbucket goes down?" when I asked him to move our repos to the cloud, he is smiling. Sometimes it's best to keep stuff in your own servers, if you have any...

not that your own servers are up 100% all the time. But the reserve in that case you could be smiling at the sysadmin guy while he scrambles for a fix, he is just happy not being at fault and having to fix it ;-)

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#47

Post by sevensor »

exikyut wrote: post #26
yebyen wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you have to painstakingly earn the right to downvote, you just can't feel bad about using it once in a while.

Hi, I've always been curious what the quota/threshold is. My last account (i336_) got to 1000+ (before I accidentally locked it...) and I never saw the downvote button. Is it like 10,000 or something?

Either they tweak the threshold over time, or there are other factors than karma. I'm sure I gained a downvote button well before 1000. I don't think it's particularly useful -- I only use it when I think a comment isn't worth reading at all. I usually upvote people when I think they're wrong, so we can have an interesting discussion.

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#48

Post by icebraining »

hobofan wrote: post #40
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is blockchain related to this?

Blockchains allow for a distributed, mutable permissioned system that are required(?) for features like "Who is allowed to push to this named repository?". You can also leave stuff like that out, but then you will end up with a system where everyone can only push to their own forks leaving us with a very splintered distributed system. To compensate we would need a much better system for distributed content discovery…

You don't need a Blockchain for that. You just store the public keys of the allowed users on the repository itself.

Giving readable names to repositories is a possible use case, although I'd just use DNS.

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#49

Post by sevensor »

smudgymcscmudge wrote: post #38
exikyut wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi, I've always been curious what the quota/threshold is. My last account (i336_) got to 1000+ (before I accidentally locked it...) and I never saw the downvote button. Is it like 10,000 or something?

Your user page shows you how much karma you need to hit the next level. In your case, you need 172 to downvote comments. https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=exikyut

I had no idea! Thanks for the pointer. There are more levels?

Re: Bitbucket Down - Major Outage

#50

Post by epicide »

ericfrederich wrote: post #11

I've said it before and I'll say it again... It makes zero sense to centralize something that was meant to be decentralized. We need issues, pull requests, comments, milestones, wiki, etc... all to be decentralized. No reason this stuff cannot be modeled using existing Git objects. GitHub, GitLab and BitBucket are extremely similar. Almost 100% overlap, you could use the lowest common denominator between the 3 and yo…

I think git-the-tool (i.e. the CLI tool) makes sense to be decentralized as it's at the core. If that tool were built around the idea of a central repository (like SVN), then you cannot escape that centralization (without using what are effectively hacks).

I don't think it is wrong to then choose to have a centralized workflow on top of it. There are tradeoffs for either one, so choose what works best for your team.

For example, I couldn't imagine trying to onboard new client employees to a project without having some sort of centralized single-point-of-truth repository. Getting them to grok GitHub (and friends) is hard enough, sometimes.

Post reply on HN