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

GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–48 of 48 posts

Re: GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

#41

Post by pchernik »

bgrainger wrote: post #40
bob1029 wrote: post #13

I keep threatening to move us to enterprise but the temperature never quite gets high enough to push me over the actual threshold. I would be curious if anyone else on HN is responsible for running a GH Enterprise instance and whether or not the extra liability is worth it.

We've been running GitHub Enterprise Server (first on-prem, now in a Cloud VM) for many years. Size: low thousands of repos, less than a terabyte of total data. Pros: Not affected by GitHub.com downtime; stability has generally been good for us; you have full control over the org and user names on the instance (instead of having to pick globally-unique ones on github.com); can sync licenses between GHES and github.co…

Have you considered the "Enterprise Managed Users" feature? In my understanding this is where GitHub runs a separate instance of GitHub for you (i.e. it's not on public github.com) and one of the benefits (in my understanding) is things like globally-unique org names and such no longer applies.

Re: GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

#42

Post by rvz »

throwusawayus wrote: post #37
rvz wrote: post #21

Again? Last time an incident like that happened was Packages which was less than 24 hours ago. [0] Before that weeks ago [1] At this point, it is clear that GitHub is essentially falling apart and is becoming extremely unreliable. It's not too late to join the serious projects like Blender, ReactOS, RedoxOS, etc who are happily self hosting and are not going all in on GitHub. I posit that they even have better uptime…

why always repeatedly write the same comment about not going “all in on github” in these threads? what is goal of writing this hundred+ times? https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... i dislike github quite alot but this does not achieve anything. no one else is saying to go all in on github so what is this even reply to?

> why always repeatedly write the same comment about not going “all in on github” in these threads? what is goal of writing this hundred+ times?

Because I can. How many more times does a service need to go down in less than a month to deem it unacceptable for any use? Unless you think paying for downtime is acceptable?

> i dislike github quite alot but this does not achieve anything.

That is not my problem since I saw the problem years ago and chose to self-host instead. Rather than others complain to GitHub, they might as well self-host instead for reliability.

If you can setup a simple SaaS website, you can easily self-host a Gitlab / Gitea instance for 1 to 5 people. It's not that hard.

> no one else is saying to go all in on github so what is this even reply to?

So you didn't read this then?

>> We're all in on Github actions these days but there was a time when we used to maintain our own Jenkins instance. [0]

>> At this point, our self-hosted CI and code review tooling has had significantly better uptime for the past year. [1]

The schadenfreude for GitHub's unreliability and some of its fans celebrating monthly down time only makes it hilarious to watch.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26302907

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26301740

Re: GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

#43

Post by throwusawayus »

rvz wrote: post #42
throwusawayus wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why always repeatedly write the same comment about not going “all in on github” in these threads? what is goal of writing this hundred+ times? https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu... i dislike github quite alot but this does not achieve anything. no one else is saying to go all in on github so what is this even reply to?

> why always repeatedly write the same comment about not going “all in on github” in these threads? what is goal of writing this hundred+ times? Because I can. How many more times does a service need to go down in less than a month to deem it unacceptable for any use? Unless you think paying for downtime is acceptable? > i dislike github quite alot but this does not achieve anything. That is not my problem since I sa…

so, because two people said they go all in on github on an hn thread TWO YEARS AGO , you feel the need to post public i-told-you-so hundreds of times ???!???

i am amazed @dang is ok with that, it seem completely deranged man, borderline harassment

Re: GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

#44

Post by bgrainger »

pchernik wrote: post #41
bgrainger wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We've been running GitHub Enterprise Server (first on-prem, now in a Cloud VM) for many years. Size: low thousands of repos, less than a terabyte of total data. Pros: Not affected by GitHub.com downtime; stability has generally been good for us; you have full control over the org and user names on the instance (instead of having to pick globally-unique ones on github.com); can sync licenses between GHES and github.co…

Have you considered the "Enterprise Managed Users" feature? In my understanding this is where GitHub runs a separate instance of GitHub for you (i.e. it's not on public github.com) and one of the benefits (in my understanding) is things like globally-unique org names and such no longer applies.

That's a good point: Enterprise Managed Users does solve the globally-unique-username issue, but comes with its own list of limitations: https://docs.github.com/en/enterprise-cloud@latest/admin/ide...

We concluded it was overkill for us (but we're not primarily using github.com anyway).

Re: GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

#45

Post by rvz »

throwusawayus wrote: post #43
rvz wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> why always repeatedly write the same comment about not going “all in on github” in these threads? what is goal of writing this hundred+ times? Because I can. How many more times does a service need to go down in less than a month to deem it unacceptable for any use? Unless you think paying for downtime is acceptable? > i dislike github quite alot but this does not achieve anything. That is not my problem since I sa…

so, because two people said they go all in on github on an hn thread TWO YEARS AGO , you feel the need to post public i-told-you-so hundreds of times ???!??? i am amazed @dang is ok with that, it seem completely deranged man, borderline harassment

I already gave the solution years ago [0] and each time GitHub goes down, hundreds of comments continue to complain when the solution is right in front of their eyes.

> i am amazed @dang is ok with that, it seem completely deranged man, borderline harassment

What harassment exactly? That whatever helpful advice I said in [0] and not 'centralizing everything to GitHub' seems to have aged well?

There is nothing 'deranged' about explaining preventative solutions like 'self-hosting' to those still using an unreliable service. In fact, it is more 'deranged' to believe that GitHub has gotten any more reliable after Microsoft acquired it.

You can continue to use GitHub's services, but don't complain when something from GitHub goes down again in less than a months time when the solution has been in front of you for years.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22867803

Re: GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

#46

Post by throwusawayus »

rvz wrote: post #45
throwusawayus wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so, because two people said they go all in on github on an hn thread TWO YEARS AGO , you feel the need to post public i-told-you-so hundreds of times ???!??? i am amazed @dang is ok with that, it seem completely deranged man, borderline harassment

I already gave the solution years ago [0] and each time GitHub goes down, hundreds of comments continue to complain when the solution is right in front of their eyes. > i am amazed @dang is ok with that, it seem completely deranged man, borderline harassment What harassment exactly? That whatever helpful advice I said in [0] and not 'centralizing everything to GitHub' seems to have aged well? There is nothing 'derang…

i pointed out no one in THIS THREAD said anything about “all in on github” and you replied linking to different thread from TWO YEARS AGO. deranged!

who else posts i-told-you-so’s hundreds of times for two years shouting to void? is madness!

>> it is more 'deranged' to believe that GitHub has gotten any more reliable after Microsoft acquired it.

ok? and who in THIS THREAD is saying anything remotely like that?

>> You can continue to use GitHub's services, but don't complain when something from GitHub goes down again

i dont use githubs services, where did i say i do?

i have not conplained about github going down

who are you responding to??!?? comments makes no sense, derangement!!!

Re: GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

#47

Post by rvz »

throwusawayus wrote: post #46
rvz wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I already gave the solution years ago [0] and each time GitHub goes down, hundreds of comments continue to complain when the solution is right in front of their eyes. > i am amazed @dang is ok with that, it seem completely deranged man, borderline harassment What harassment exactly? That whatever helpful advice I said in [0] and not 'centralizing everything to GitHub' seems to have aged well? There is nothing 'derang…

i pointed out no one in THIS THREAD said anything about “all in on github” and you replied linking to different thread from TWO YEARS AGO. deranged! who else posts i-told-you-so’s hundreds of times for two years shouting to void? is madness! >> it is more 'deranged' to believe that GitHub has gotten any more reliable after Microsoft acquired it. ok? and who in THIS THREAD is saying anything remotely like that? >> You…

Seems like you're the one that is showing signs of 'derangement' and episodes of 'madness'. I'm just laughing at you and also at the ones that still continue to rely on a service that evidently goes down each month with the solution given to them, years ago.

> ok? and who in THIS THREAD is saying anything remotely like that?

Whatever someone said about exactly “all in on github” verbaitim is a 'minute detail' you decided to focus on to deliberately miss the forrest for the trees and to make an excuse for an argument. I also include using any of GitHub's services, which as the evidence suggests is beyond poor and comes with folks here complaining about them. Especially GitHub Actions.

So you attempting to narrow the scope to who said what verbaitim from the start is essentially missing the wider point. In fact, it is a distraction, derailing the general and entire point of GitHub's years of unreliability.

> who are you responding to??!?? comments makes no sense, derangement!!!

So far, you for showing yourself as a prime example fitting the definition of 'derangement' and to everyone else who is complaining about GitHub going down despite its track record, assuming you have read the links. There's no need for you to continue embarrassing yourself here and in your next reply, since you continue screaming and 'shouting' in caps-lock whilst attempting to put forward distractions that fails to address the main issue of GitHub's history of downtime and incidents.

Re: GitHub Actions Down / Degraded

#48

Post by throwusawayus »

rvz wrote: post #47
throwusawayus wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i pointed out no one in THIS THREAD said anything about “all in on github” and you replied linking to different thread from TWO YEARS AGO. deranged! who else posts i-told-you-so’s hundreds of times for two years shouting to void? is madness! >> it is more 'deranged' to believe that GitHub has gotten any more reliable after Microsoft acquired it. ok? and who in THIS THREAD is saying anything remotely like that? >> You…

Seems like you're the one that is showing signs of 'derangement' and episodes of 'madness'. I'm just laughing at you and also at the ones that still continue to rely on a service that evidently goes down each month with the solution given to them, years ago. > ok? and who in THIS THREAD is saying anything remotely like that? Whatever someone said about exactly “all in on github” verbaitim is a 'minute detail' you dec…

you are spending time creating multi-year linked list of hn comments every single time a website you dislike and dont use goes down

i am “failing to address main issue of github’s downtime history”? indeed sure i am not addressing this, because it is not my care to address! why care when website i dont use and dont like goes down? not my problem!

do you see anyone else on entire hn creating redundant toplevel comments that then link to previous comment on same topic, spanning hundreds of comments across multiple years, all to post told-you-so to some random other commenters from 2-3 years ago? no one else do this, is deranged!

Post reply on HN