Github, thanks for making this service available free for public repos, it's a big boon.
Currently the runner has only 14GB of disk space, if that can be made to 50 GB, that would be amazing !
Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
741–750 of 853 posts
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#742At getstream.io we ended up running Github Actions on Hetzner. The end-result is 4x faster builds for 3x less $$$.
Running workers ourselves was the last resort, we tried everything else but it was impossible to get fast (and consistent) build times otherwise.
In a way we are now going to get charged for Github's poor execution on Actions.
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#743Earlier quoted context omitted.
From https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-platforms-cory-doctorow/ "Here is how platforms die: First, they are good to their users; then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers; finally, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves. Then, they die." We are on step 2: then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers .
It is not abuse to charge what amounts to a relatively small fee for a useful service.
It's not "a relatively small fee for a useful service".
It's an unnecessary fee to use self-hosted (i.e., not GitHub-hosted) components in CI pipelines.
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#744Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Yeah I can't see a better alternative to GitHub. OSS can build truly incredible libraries and frameworks. User facing products? ehhhhh not so much. GitHub has gotten worse over the years but it's not like there's some gold standard open source alternative. And remember, early GH was filled with a pretty amazing group of developers and open source advocates. If the counter is that, instead of buying github, we could h…
Forge, Gitea, and git itself contains a cgi script with quite a bit of functionality. And of course, the way it is supposed to work, git-over-ssh, as in give committers Linux shell accounts on a shared machine, with the CGI script running for pretty pictures (Remember CGI? You know, "cloud functions" before such a thing existed)
Huh, I should make an Apache plugin that launches docker exported containers uploaded into a directory.
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#745Earlier quoted context omitted.
1 hour build/test time, 20 devs, that's 50 runs a month. Totally possible.
GH actions templates don’t build all branches by default. I guess it’s due to them not wanting the free tier to use to much resources. But I consider it an anti-pattern to not build everything at each push.
That is because GH Actions is event based, that is more powerful and flexible than just triggering on every push and not letting it be configured.
``` on: push ```
is the event trigger to act on every push.
You'll waste a lot of CI on building everything in my opinion, I only really care about the pull request.
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#746Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can someone share a Github bot that doesn't depend on actions? I mean maybe https://github.com/rust-lang/bors is enough to fully replace Github Actions? (not sure)
You can use webhooks to replace Github Actions: https://docs.github.com/en/webhooks/about-webhooks Listen to webhooks for new commits + PRs, and then use the commit status API to push statuses: https://docs.github.com/en/rest/commits/statuses?apiVersion=...
I mean, is there some open source project that already uses webhooks to replace Github Actions?
Rather than having to write some ad hoc code to do this
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#747Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Yeah I can't see a better alternative to GitHub. OSS can build truly incredible libraries and frameworks. User facing products? ehhhhh not so much. GitHub has gotten worse over the years but it's not like there's some gold standard open source alternative. And remember, early GH was filled with a pretty amazing group of developers and open source advocates. If the counter is that, instead of buying github, we could h…
I'm a contractor so have worked on a lot of different projects for different companies, big and small and also early startups.
This is far from truth imo. It is very possible to only use (F)OSS. Github, AWS, Azure, Vercel are not at all more pleasant or easier to work with than on-prem Gitlab/gitea/codeberg/jenkins/k8s/kibana/prometheus/grafana.
I could spend an hour and have a full setup done on physical or VPS to have 1) remote git hosting 2) pipelines running on changes 3) pipelines publishing images or some artifacts 4) automated deployment for these images/artifacts
I'm struggling to see what am I missing. What is worthwhile that Github offers? It is popular and easy to set up org+repos, but that seems it. A few years ago I was working on Azure Devops with the azure pipeline and that was the worst developer experience I've ever had. AFAIK Github actions uses the same syntax and works the same way, at least it was at that time.
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#748It 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…
There's always been this lesson with CI/CD - don't couple yourself to a specific product. If you do, you're gonna get screwed eventually. It happened with TravisCI, CircleCI, now it's happening with GitHub. The business model only makes sense if you can charge for it, those charges are only ever going to go up.
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#749I was born in 1993. I kind of heard lots of rumbling about Microsoft being evil as I grew up, but I wasn't fully understanding of the anti trust thing. It used to suprise me that people saw cool tech from Microsoft (like VSCode) and complain about it. I now see the first innings of a very silly game Microsoft are going to start playing over the next few years. Sure, they are going to make lots of money, but a whole g…
Microsoft had a very fair shot at redeeming themselves, but with how Teams, GitHub and all the AI crap they push into GitHub and Windows, it's clear they have not changed one bit.
They did change a lot. Previously Microsoft actually cared about its main product lines. They did lots of anticompetitive things to get people onboarded. Being anticompetitive and making products that deeply bundled stuff was their evil badge not hypetrain rugpulls. However, they were adding features developers and sysadmins wanted. That's how so many businesses got Active Directory. There is still no equivalent alternative to AD. There are subsets but no equivalent set of the complete featureset. After Ballmer the company changed.
Microsoft of Nadella is different. It looks more like a boring Silicon Valley monopoly. They had good products years ago and it got people hooked and now its a game of endless rugpulls. Microsoft of now doesn't care about the featureset. They just jump from one hype train to another. People keep paying them for the stuff they did in early 2000s. Nobody cares about newer stuff including Microsoft themselves.
Re: Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
#750Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not an option for the majority of companies as it only allows open source repositories as far as I'm aware.
Selfhosting gitea is trivial , I'm saying this as someone who has been doing it at work for almost 6 years. Our experience has recently prompted another org (run by people we know) to move off GitHub, they also seem to be happy.
There are plenty of alternatives to Github, from Gitlab and Gittea to Forgejo, but Codeberg is not one of them, which is what I wanted to stress.