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

Incident with Actions – Resolved

githubstatus.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 90 posts

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#81

Post by captn3m0 »

semenko wrote: post #46

GitHub's COO shared this under-reported X post last month [1] on their exponential growth. I'd love to see more proactive messaging on their growth rate / vision for agentic interactions. > … platform activity is surging. There were 1 billion commits in 2025. Now, it's 275 million per week, on pace for 14 billion this year if growth remains linear (spoiler: it won't.) > GitHub Actions has grown from 500M minutes/week…

One of the sources of that problem is that GitHub is pushing all new products on top of Actions, making it load-bearing. A few examples are Dependabot, Pages, and Copilot Reviews. These aren't products that need to run on a CI system. Dependabot worked fine before Actions was a thing. Same with Pages, which ran fine for more than a decade without Actions.

My outsider perspective is that GitHub teams are having to fight for compute, and since Actions can be billed and timed, it has become the default compute layer for everything. But it makes for a terrible experience as an end-user.

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#82

Post by foundatron »

SoftTalker wrote: post #70
isbvhodnvemrwvn wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A ton of third-party tools only work with the most popular providers, github, and then gitlab, then nothing, then the rest.

OK, but if using these tools means tolerating ~80% uptime then maybe reconsider.

First they came for the four nines And I did not speak out Because I was not a power grid

Then they came for the three nines And I did not speak out Because I was not paying for Enterprise

Then they came for the two nines And I did not speak out Because the status page said all systems operational

Then they came for the one nine And I did not speak out Because I was a manager, and outages are just extra standup material

Then they came for the coin flip And there was no one left to merge my PR Because Actions was down And so was Pages And so was Codespaces And the status page said all systems operational

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#83

Post by deepdarkforest »

bulte-rs wrote: post #57
deepdarkforest wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

compute?? Github is struggling because of compute, which comes from everyone vibecoding and triggering actions 10x more. I can vibecode an alternative, but once i have users, who is going to secure this amount of compute? Compute+talent to manage it(devops isnt vibecoded *yet) is a moat

Why care about making a commercial alternative? I just want a “forge” for my team that looks like a combination of GitHub and tangled (stacked PRs and JJ). So I’m working on waza.sh. I have NO intent on making it commercial, nor open-source (unless someone wants to collab on it). Will it need compute? Yes! For my team only. So a dedicated box at OVH/Hetzner for 30eu is more than sufficient.

lol do you not have actual stuff to prioritize for your team rather than re inventing forges? there are quite a few open source alternatives if you want something quick. Fork them. No need to re invent the wheel

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#85

Post by ibrahima »

Aurornis wrote: post #32

I'm frustrated with GitHub's stability, too, but we should be clear that GitHub wasn't down. They're one of the more honest services when it comes to posting service degradations, unlike some other platforms where teams will resist updating the status page until it's an undeniable site-wide outage. > We are working with our compute provider to alleviate elevated queue times and failures for Actions Jobs running on Ho…

Isn't their compute provider Microsoft (their owner)?

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#86

Post by pinustorbald »

gbro3n wrote: post #50
semenko wrote: post #46

GitHub's COO shared this under-reported X post last month [1] on their exponential growth. I'd love to see more proactive messaging on their growth rate / vision for agentic interactions. > … platform activity is surging. There were 1 billion commits in 2025. Now, it's 275 million per week, on pace for 14 billion this year if growth remains linear (spoiler: it won't.) > GitHub Actions has grown from 500M minutes/week…

This is the effect of agentic workflows. I know how much faster I've been going since the agents got good. I'm not surprised they're struggling.

Bro you deserve a refund if that's the code you're getting out of agents. WTF

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#87

Post by financetechbro »

hobofan wrote: post #64
datadrivenangel wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're being forced to be less dishonest. They're not going to count this as downtime anyways. They're reporting 100% uptime for April: https://www.githubstatus.com/

Not sure what content you are seeing on the page, but the only 100% I see on that page is for something called "Copilot AI Model Providers" that was launched less then a month ago.

I see six different 100%s on the page

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#88

Post by michalsustr »

8organicbits wrote: post #65
michalsustr wrote: post #7

Why don’t they just raise GitHub actions prices? Supply and demand, that would sort itself

One challenge is that they have a ton of usage under their free tier, especially by free and open source projects which have near zero budgets. Its an artificial economy of projects that cannot pay for their own usage. Another challenge is that the GitHub Actions paid tier is already very expensive, the quality of service is poor, and they have major security challenges. They could load shed by raising prices, drivin…

Interesting. So one way to interpret current situation is that Github is "trapped" by its open source offering. This will likely have implications soon on what they do or the direction of open source...

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#89

Post by bulte-rs »

deepdarkforest wrote: post #83
bulte-rs wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why care about making a commercial alternative? I just want a “forge” for my team that looks like a combination of GitHub and tangled (stacked PRs and JJ). So I’m working on waza.sh. I have NO intent on making it commercial, nor open-source (unless someone wants to collab on it). Will it need compute? Yes! For my team only. So a dedicated box at OVH/Hetzner for 30eu is more than sufficient.

lol do you not have actual stuff to prioritize for your team rather than re inventing forges? there are quite a few open source alternatives if you want something quick. Fork them. No need to re invent the wheel

$COMPANY is on Github now, thinking of moving to Codeberg/Forgejo.

This is a personal pet project, just to see what it might look like, how it would work, to satisfy personal curiosity. If it comes to the point that it actually becomes usable for the team (read: actually add value), then it's up to $TEAM to decide whether to use it or not.

I would hate my team to waste company time on such an endeavour. ;-)

Re: Incident with Actions – Resolved

#90

Post by gbro3n »

pinustorbald wrote: post #86
gbro3n wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the effect of agentic workflows. I know how much faster I've been going since the agents got good. I'm not surprised they're struggling.

Bro you deserve a refund if that's the code you're getting out of agents. WTF

Legendary comment. Thank you for your insight, wit and for taking the time to contribute.
Post reply on HN