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

Incident with Github.com [resolved]

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#571

Post by stephenway »

dboreham wrote: post #422
georgehotz wrote: post #233

We're moving to self hosted Gitea. It's never been easier to do devops with the help of LLMs. I cannot believe how flaky GitHub is. https://git.tinygrad.win/tinygrad/tinygrad

Funny because I spent a couple of years on self-hosted Gitea, including doing some work on Gitea itself to add features we wanted. Then I changed projects and thought "well that was a lot of work, let's just do what everyone does and use GitHub". Now twiddling my thumbs this morning...wondering if I need to resurrect the Gitea deployment.

This is pretty much why I started Fjord. I like Forgejo/Gitea, but didn't think “run your own forge forever” should be the only alternative to GitHub. We run dedicated Forgejo instances for people who want that middle ground.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#572

Post by giancarlostoro »

jph wrote: post #362

Help encourage alternatives by trying Gitlab.com or Codeberg.org or Tangled.org or others, and please star some projects there to help motivate more options. Self-promo links below if you would like to star a few of mine good for developers. https://gitlab.com/architecture-decision-record https://gitlab.com/ways-of-working https://gitlab.com/coordinated-vulnerability-disclosure

Rather use BitBucket or GitLab really, both GitLab and BitBucket have been around nearly as long as GitHub? Apparently BitBucket and GitHub are both 2008, and GitLab is 2011. The others you mentioned could go on a whim.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#573

Post by pera »

stingraycharles wrote: post #52
khvn26 wrote: post #29

I 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?

Save that for your local mom-and-pop store: Microsoft is a multi-billion dollar corporation with enough resources to, at the very least, provide a reliable service for enterprise clients.

The "AI is using a lot of resources" excuse was maybe acceptable last year but not in Q3 2026.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#574

Post by nrabulinski »

sebmellen wrote: post #540
klaussilveira wrote: post #456

I encourage everyone to switch to Forgejo. We ditched GitHub and could not be happier. The experience is smoother, faster and distraction-free. Our runners are faster, our CI is smoother than ever. Transitioning was a matter of a few hours, which we took as a fun hackaton.

How complex is the CI migration? We’re heavily dependent on GitHub Actions and the full GitHub ecosystem by extension, but by the same token these frequent outages are destroying us.

Forgejo actions are by design compatible with GHA. Obviously if you still depend on github to get reusable actions you’re just as dependent on GitHub being up as ever, but you can very easily migrate or mirror GitHub repositories to your forgejo instance and in most cases migrating the CI requires close to no changes. Not all features are supported, but I haven’t had the need to make any changes to my actions, and they’re continuously making improvements so compatibility only goes up

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#575

Post by tokioyoyo »

MisterTea wrote: post #478
dkdbejwi383 wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just use GitHub for the basics: repo hosting, reviews and actions - what are the "social media psyop manipulations"? I've never really paid much attention to the other features.

All the metrics based around how many commits you have made, how many stars your repo has, etc. Why is that info gamified? Its a dopamine addiction channel.

It’s for subset of people who cares about that. You can just blanket-ignore everyone who cares about that, and move on.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#576

Post by 946789987649 »

nullify88 wrote: post #537
askonomm wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an overly optimistic view of things. For a lot of us GitHub is critical infrastructure, which if it goes down loses us and our customers money.

GitHub Enterprise Cloud has been chugging along with no issues. I hope your critical infrastructure isn't dependent on a free tier / service. And that you have a business continuity process in place.

Are you sure? We have enterprise and I couldn't even access our repo briefly.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#577

Post by thayne »

ryandrake wrote: post #278
MoreQARespect wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Git doesn't even need to be "hosted" anywhere. That's the point of it being distributed. What needs to be hosted somewhere are all the barnacles (like issue tracking, code reviewing, CI, and so on) that have grown out around git, that people and businesses have become dependent on.

It doesn't have to be. But without a hosted "source of truth", it's kinda hard to actually distribute it, and have a way to accept pull/merge requests/patches.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#578

Post by armSixtyFour »

ieie3366 wrote: post #100

To 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

Hard disagree, people are paying GitHub a lot of money.

If they are facing an influx of commits from bots maybe they need to start metering commits from those accounts and charge them money.

This is a self imposed problem.

Re: Incident with Github.com [resolved]

#580

Post by fn-mote »

artyom wrote: post #481
dkdbejwi383 wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just use GitHub for the basics: repo hosting, reviews and actions - what are the "social media psyop manipulations"? I've never really paid much attention to the other features.

It's good you can isolate yourself from it. But there's plenty of cases. Open source maintainers being harassed or being demanded work through Github's issues. Or being feed AI slop to review endlessly. Or recruiters filtering resumes via Github activity graphs or repository stars. And obviously the side shady market of all of the above (e.g. buying/selling popularity). Like the parent comment, I can't wait for socia…

> Open source maintainers being harassed or being demanded work through Github's issues

This isn't "psyops". Sure, it's a bad side of social interactions, but when you interact with other people, there's always some of this - in person as well as online.

The lead-off argument here seems more like "interacting with society can be bad".

I have no argument that selling popularity is bad and filtering by stars is stupid, but I don't blame Github for any of that.

You could equally well assign the success of certain coders to YouTube because they came to attention by showing off their work in livestreams. Which I do not. They found a way to advertise their own success, but it's theirs.

Post reply on HN