461–470 of 853 posts
Didn't see it mentioned yet but I like gitea and it's runner. It's all in Go so very low overhead. https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/act-runner
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The problem here is that this is like a grocery store charging me money for every bag I bring to bag my own groceries. This is an odd take because you're completely discounting the value of the orchestration. In your grocery store analogy, who's the orchestrator? It isn't you.
Do you feel that orchestration runs on a per-minute basis?
This is $2.88/day, $86.4/month, $1051.2/year. For them to do essentially nothing.
Most notably, this is the same price as their hosted "Linux 1-core" on a per-minute basis. Meaning they're charging you the same for running it yourself, as you'd pay for them to host it for you...
This is my first comment on HN despite being a user for over a decade -- this is one of the most outrageous pricing changes I've encountered - I couldn't believe it when I read the email earlier (I run self-hosted runners). Anyone using GitLab or any other VCM that you'd recommend? I'm absolutely done with Github. Or is everything else just as bad?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
With these changes, three things hold: 1. Services like blacksmith and WarpBuild (I'm the founder) are still cheaper than GitHub hosted runners, even after including the $0.002/min self-hosting tax. 2. The biggest lever for controlling costs now is reducing the number of minutes used in CI. Given how slow Github's runners are, or even the ones on AWS compared to our baremetal processor single core performance + nvme…
I checked the WarpBuild website and got excited because the header in the menu says you have macOS Intel runners, but then you click through and it doesn't seem to be so? Right now at my company our biggest complaint are macOS Intel runners from GitHub which somehow take 15+ minutes to provision and are the slowest of the bunch.
Nowadays GH has more sizes by WB continues to beat them in price and performance.
It’s highway robbery what GH charges for the crap they provide. I can highly recommend WarpBuild for Mac (and Linux) runners.
I guess I’ll start to look at an alternative to GitHub self hosted runners. It’s been awhile since I looked. What’s a good alternative?
-- Winston Churchill (probably)
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?
It sounds like a bad deal right? Except the alternative is I do this for free but also I'm doing all the testing and providing the hardware. I'm only going to charge you if you do most of the work yourself
Maybe it's bad business dealing with lots of non-standardized external hosts, and it drags you down.
Maybe people are abusing the free orchestration to do non-CI stuff and they're compromising legitimate users.
Look, I understand it's frustrating to some consumers. However, it's not irrational from GitHub's point of view.
It is us, developers, who convinced our management to purchase GitHub Enterprise to be our forge. We didn't pay any heed to the values of software freedom. A closed source, proprietary software had good features. We saw that and convinced our management to purchase it. Never mind what cost it would impose in the future when the good software gets bad owners. Never mind that there were alternatives that were inferior…
Actually there were alternatives that were far superior (seriously, no way to group projects?) but also more than 2x as expensive. If GH "fixes the glitch" then it will be plan B time.
I really enjoy how they list the price PER MINUTE to make it sound like this isn't absurdly expensive. A lot of people leave their self-hosted runners running 24/7 because, after all, they're self-hosted. This is $2.88/day, $86.4/month, $1051.2/year. For them to do essentially nothing. Most notably, this is the same price as their hosted "Linux 1-core" on a per-minute basis. Meaning they're charging you the same for…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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?
no, I'd cut the monthly seat cost and grow my user base to include more low-volume devs but realistically, publishing a web page is practically free. you could be sending 100x as much data and I would still be laughing all the way to the bank
If you think that's easy, do it for me. I have some projects to migrate, give me the link of your service.