Live data from Hacker News

Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

resources.github.com

671–680 of 853 posts

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#671

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Form submission spam. Unique/'untraceable' IPs...

How do they abuse self hosted runners?

Malware in build scripts/dependencies. That's not exclusively credential/crypto-stealers, there's apparently also a healthy demand for various types of spam straight from corpo gateways...

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#672
I'm late to the party, but Gitea as has Gitea Actions[0] based on their fork[1] of act[2]. Their claim is that it's mostly compatible with GitHub Actions. I wonder if this can be spun off to have the control plane run separately and integrate into GitHub Action. Or alternatively mirror the repo for Gitea Actions only.

[0] https://docs.gitea.com/usage/actions/overview

[1] https://gitea.com/gitea/act / https://gitea.com/gitea/act_runner

[2] http://github.com/nektos/act

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#673
post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think Forgejo is competitive in the markets GitHub makes most of their money from, nor does it seem Forgejo developers want it to be.

Where does GitHub even make most of their money? Their compliance posture makes them a non-starter for any regulated industries (which is atypical for a Microsoft property, generally MS is the market leader for compliance in all of their products).

Places might be officially regulated, but neither government agencies, healthcare, finance or defense industries are as strict as you think. People have to get stuff done, and most are usually quite incompetent in these protected industries.

Microsoft’s sales reps know this.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And I mean sure, everything is kinda janky on Jenkins, but everything falls into an expectable corridor of jank you get used to. Self-hosting Jenkins on an EC2 instance is probably going to result in a _better_ experience at this point. Github Cache is barely better than just downloading assets directly, and with Jenkins you can trivially use a local disk for caching. Or if you're feeling fancy and want more isolat…

Self-hosting on a host whose data actually persists is an even better experience, as it removes a lot of the tedium and workarounds such as extracting/down-/up-loading caches and so on. Get another host for redundancy and call it a day. Hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper, but the fear-mongering around running a Linux machine has successfully prevented most businesses from reaping those cost reductions.

> Hardware is getting cheaper and cheaper

Unfortunately not anymore and not in the foreseen future if we don't see some AI investment corrections.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#675

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you were paying me a monthly license fee for each developer working on your repos, I'd probably consider it

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?

why wouldn't you? these are easily compressible text files. storing even like 100x into a 400 day (at most, the default for GH is 90) box is downright cheap to do on even massive scales.

it's 2025, for log files and a spicy cron daemon (you pay for the artifact storage), it's practically free to do so. this isn't like the days of Western Union where paying $0.35 to send some data across the world is a good deal

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#676

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…

Whatever your issues with the price, this comment is truly wild. When you’re using commercial PyCharm, you’re paying JetBrains to “run their software on your hardware.”

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#677

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just curious - what do you think the current best git platforms are?

Azure DevOps is the gold standard for Pipelines.

Really?

I grant you pipelines are the best bit about ado, but the fact that you can’t test them is a pain.

And the webhooks and templating are pretty messy and unpleasant quickly.

We’re changing from ADO to GitHub (had to be an MS product for corporate) and the infra people are looking forward to GHA as they prefer their maintenance to ADO pipelines.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#678

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What ever happened to Hudson/Jenkins? That was the full featured CI/CD solution before github actions.

I'm not at all a fan of GitHub actions, but come on, Hudson/Jenkins was a nightmare world, GitHub actions is a million times better

Jenkins is in every way a “Java” program, and not the good kind.

What you can say for it, is that it was free and near infinitely hackable.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#679

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…

> learn from our mistakes and convince our teams and management to use community-maintained, libre alternatives Every company I've been at that tried to self-host something like GitLab, later moved to GitHub. Nobody in business cares if it's open source/free software. They care about managed hosting, centralized services, invoicing, etc. DIY is great for hobbyists and the cash-strapped.

> Every company I've been at that tried to self-host something like GitLab, later moved to GitHub

Interesting, my experience has been the opposite. 99% of companies I've seen self host their VCS, it has been Gitlab (with some rare sel-hosted GitHub Enterprise everyone seems to hate, and the very rare Bitbucket).

To be fair most of them started with it when Gitlab was really really ahead, features wise. The gap has somewhat closed, but Gitlab is still a superior product IMO. Just the fact that you can have an actual organisational structure, and move it around, and share variables/configs between groupings, beats anything GitHub have to offer which is slightly nicer than GitLab.

Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions

#680

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…

Takes like these do not account for the value you gained by using the software in the meantime. Here are 2 scenarios: 1) company uses exclusively free software, spends more time dealing with the shortcomings of said software than developing product, product is half baked and doesn't sell well, company dies. 2) company uses proprietary but cheap/free (as in beer) software that does the job really well, focuses on deve…

The first part is wrong, it’s a question of org size. A lot of large orgs hand roll a lot of these things, they call it developer excellence.

And your last paragraph hits the nail on the head, people are afraid to run their own software.

Post reply on HN