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

GitHub Incident

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 99 posts

Re: GitHub Incident

#81

Post by kps »

TheJoeMan wrote: post #61
MisterTea wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's like 100,000 USD. I keep thinking about making a rap video wearing a 10 TB gold chain surrounded by big booty girls with their naughty bits covered in m.2 SSD's while dissing the AI industry. Though I cant afford the RAM :-/

It’s sad that I can’t interpret if you mean to actually shoot your rap video on film, or have an AI generate it lol. Either way you’re going to need RAM.

Shooting on film doesn't need any RAM. Unfortunately the price of silver is also through the roof.

Re: GitHub Incident

#82

Post by fhd2 »

stefan_ wrote: post #77
pxc wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the quality-first, high uptime alternative to GitHub? My employer uses both GitHub and GitLab, and while I think GitLab is better, its quality also frankly sucks. It's riddled with bugs that have just been marinating on the issue tracker for years, and the most common "fix" for gnarly bugs in the CI platform is "revise the documentation to reflect the existing (broken) behavior".

It's amazing, before we even had ChatGPT, GitLab was building so much endless slop halfbaked crap in their pursuit of ever more "enterprise checkboxes". Now they have slowed right down, no doubt collapsing under the escalating maintenance weight of all the nonsense that was created, like the canaries in the vibe coding mines telling us of impending doom. Now you go to their blog, theres a banner at the top announcing…

Maybe it's GU already.

Re: GitHub Incident

#83

Post by nine_k »

zxcvasd wrote: post #68
nine_k wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends how high you value your headaches, and how high, your org's downtime. Github not working accrues over the hourly rate of every developer affected, which is likely $70-$100 a hour. 10 hours of outage in a year affecting a team of 10 would cost north of $70k, enough to hire a part-time SRE dedicated just to tend to your Gitlab installation.

> 10 hours of outage in a year affecting a team of 10 would cost north of $70k 10 hours x 10 developers x $70 per hour = $7000, not $70000.

Thank you for the correction! This indeed completely changes the picture :-\

Re: GitHub Incident

#84

Post by ferguess_k »

pxc wrote: post #73
ferguess_k wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless some major customers are moving away, I don't think they are going to seriously care about it.

What is the quality-first, high uptime alternative to GitHub? My employer uses both GitHub and GitLab, and while I think GitLab is better, its quality also frankly sucks. It's riddled with bugs that have just been marinating on the issue tracker for years, and the most common "fix" for gnarly bugs in the CI platform is "revise the documentation to reflect the existing (broken) behavior".

*Stupid question*: What is so hard about self hosting one's own repo? I get it must be difficult for a mega corporation, but for companies like us, who have hundreds of repos but only 20 of them are regularly used, and concurrent read/write is relatively light -- considering our largest team is less than 20 persons, so even if all of them are reading/writing from the repo, it doesn't seem to be a huge issue.

Even for a bigger company, say 5x developers (we have about 100+ SWEs and maybe 10-20 other titles who use GitHub), is it really a big thing to self host their own repos? External applications are definitely on another level because you could have hundreds of concurrent visits easily.

What did I miss?

Re: GitHub Incident

#85

Post by pxc »

ferguess_k wrote: post #84
pxc wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the quality-first, high uptime alternative to GitHub? My employer uses both GitHub and GitLab, and while I think GitLab is better, its quality also frankly sucks. It's riddled with bugs that have just been marinating on the issue tracker for years, and the most common "fix" for gnarly bugs in the CI platform is "revise the documentation to reflect the existing (broken) behavior".

*Stupid question*: What is so hard about self hosting one's own repo? I get it must be difficult for a mega corporation, but for companies like us, who have hundreds of repos but only 20 of them are regularly used, and concurrent read/write is relatively light -- considering our largest team is less than 20 persons, so even if all of them are reading/writing from the repo, it doesn't seem to be a huge issue. Even for…

> What is so hard about self hosting one's own repo?

Maybe nothing! I was genuinely asking. I still don't know what Actually Good™ forges are out there these days, generally suitable for corporate use in place of the likes of GitHub or GitLab. Forgejo? Something not based on Git?

Re: GitHub Incident

#86

Post by ChromaticPanic »

appplication wrote: post #62
supriyo-biswas wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my experience companies are moving into GitHub for Copilot and GHA.

GHA maybe, but copilot is just another mid tier player in a congested space.

It's a cheap mid tier player. You get more tokens per dollar.

Re: GitHub Incident

#87

Post by 0xbadcafebee »

NewJazz wrote: post #52
0xbadcafebee wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

^ this. the last thing i want is to add to my workload. take my money and make my life easier, even if it means that for one hour every couple months i can't do anything

Have you ever actually hosted gitlab?

Not only have I hosted it, I've helped migrate two gitlab instances to github enterprise, because we didn't want to maintain it anymore

Re: GitHub Incident

#88

Post by kyleee »

rvz wrote: post #10
arm32 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We did hire some, boss! Soshie, Vizzy and Dexter. They're AI, but they're supposed to be way better than a human SRE. At least that's what the Sintra salesguy told us.

So that's what the Tay, and Zoe AI bots were doing all this time after they were cancelled and banned off of Twitter. Working on the GitHub Azure migration and for years it's gone so well so far.

I hope someone’s been reviewing their work in case they’ve been adding certain german related Easter eggs

Re: GitHub Incident

#89

Post by sham1 »

sirmoveon wrote: post #76
TZubiri wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, workers can still commit to their local git. I've been looking into having a separate git server that we can commit to and add plain ole git hooks to, and just having it be synced with github as a clone.

Check out Gitea. Its kind of a clone of github but you can self host.

I'd rather recommend Forgejo (a fork of Gitea developed under the auspices of Codeberg e.V.) instead. The way in which Gitea broke the trust of the community seems like it probably should be avoided nowadays.

Re: GitHub Incident

#90

Post by sublinear »

nine_k wrote: post #40
jbverschoor wrote: post #24

Good thing git is a distributed system

Git is! PRs and code review are not. CI/CD is not. I mean, there are solutions, but none of them seems to have a large enough mindshare and efficiency. (Even though Github's code review tools are pretty spartan.)

You'd be surprised how far a lot of places got just using git notes and jenkins for a very long time.
Post reply on HN