GitHub was having issues

https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/9rfydl2xdqqj

by rock_artist • 11 months ago

336 221 11 months ago

githubstatus.com

meepmorp3• 11 months ago

Actually, the big problem for me is that github doesn't have issues at the moment.

TonyTrapp• 11 months ago

Yep, issues are having issues, resulting in user not seeing issues

boesboes• 11 months ago

Yeah, i was pretty glad to see i have zero open issue remaining today!

jsk2600• 11 months ago

At least I can enjoy seeing zero issues on my projects, once in a lifetime...

legobmw99• 11 months ago

Day one of the new management structure off to a rocky start

xyst3• 11 months ago

always been "rocky" since the acquisition.

This is just perfect comedic timing

acedTrex• 11 months ago

Day ends in Y

Thev00d00• 11 months ago

Vibe coded a bit too hard.

belter• 11 months ago

Did they upgrade to GitHub 11 ?

CoastalCoder• 11 months ago

Thanks to internal politics, that only possible if they have a Technical Product Manager II (TPM).

yabones• 11 months ago

The only thing worse than "it's down" is hearing "it's down again"

Godspeed, IR workers...

jeltz6• 11 months ago

Last time it was down was Friday last week when they broke some of the raw content URLs.

rs_rs_rs_rs_rs• 11 months ago

Just Github? I'm having problems logging in into Dropbox as their captcha setup fails.

halfmatthalfcat• 11 months ago

Github reliability has been abysmal the past couple of weeks.

thrdbndndn• 11 months ago

Coincidentally reddit is also down.

mock-possum• 11 months ago

Well at least there’s a silver lining then

amelius• 11 months ago

When a cool job becomes boring IT work.

zanfr• 11 months ago

well I wish nothing but the best for the great people at Microsoft, this small family business.

bootsmann2• 11 months ago

I am surprised at how much github is willing to let themselves go for being a product that can nowadays be replaced by someone over the weekend. This is the second major outage within like 2 weeks.

taude5• 11 months ago

Depends how much customization you've done to your cicd and how heavily you use custom GHA, and other plugins. No way my org could move off in a weekend.

tracker17• 11 months ago

Agreed... you could probably move a single project over pretty easily on a weekend, or several depending on how integrated you are.

reaperducer• 11 months ago

for being a product that can nowadays be replaced by someone over the weekend.

If one person can move a company move off of GitHub in a weekend, you're too small a company for Microsoft to care about.

bootsmann2• 11 months ago

It was less about moving your company away and more about the core functionality being extremely simple to reproduce.

nimbius• 11 months ago

recent developments in the C levels not withstanding, github has been a dumpster fire for quite some time now with no sign of improvement.

https://www.githubstatus.com/history

jeltz6• 11 months ago

Those are not even all. They had an incident with raw content on the 8th which is not listed.

metalliqaz3• 11 months ago

Dear sages of HN, what is the scrappy new upstart project that will rise up to take Github's place? Because this is becoming intolerable.

meepmorp3• 11 months ago

It's kind of weird that we've collectively decided on a distributed version control system, while centralizing where we keep the repositories and metadata.

ryandv2• 11 months ago

This is because the dream of true P2P decentralization died with NAT and IPv4 exhaustion.

metalliqaz3• 11 months ago

I think it's just a simple reality that most projects don't actually need or want a decentralized development process. In my experience, most projects are looking for a single, high-reliability canonical source that is in control of project leadership. Most projects are only developed by a small group, maybe even only one person.

john01dav4• 11 months ago

I think that the answer here is eventual widespread use of many smaller options, from FSF's Savannah to self-hosted gitea/forejo/gitlab.

Git is in a good position to support this.

cAtte_• 11 months ago

not gonna happen. society loves monopolies because they're convenient

evilmonkey19• 11 months ago

I'm a fan of github but lately i'm seeing a lot of issues like these... Also they don't have yet support for IPv6 (surprising).

awestroke• 11 months ago

The refusal to support IPv6 is embarrassing at this point

geoffeg• 11 months ago

I thought a recent downtime was contributed to rolling out the initial prep for IPv6 support.

kevingadd• 11 months ago

Had to buy an IPv4 address for a VPS the other day in order to clone some git repositories. Couldn't believe it. Costing their customers money when they should be able to support v6 by now.

jiggawatts2• 11 months ago

Azure has “support” for IPv6 that just “works”, so… they could just turn it on.

Oh, you’re wondering about the air quotes?

Don’t worry about it! Sales told my boss that that feature checkbox has a “tick”.

depr• 11 months ago

Given that they are probably at least partly on Azure, this makes it less surprising because Azure has the worst IPv6 implementation of the 3 large cloud providers.

77pt772• 11 months ago

Possibly stupid question but, how can someone mess that up?

What is wrong/missing?

rvz• 11 months ago

No CEO of GitHub to contact about this outage this time.

numbsafari5• 11 months ago

Contact Satya Nadella.

siva7• 11 months ago

The guy who framed Github as a stellar example of how Microsoft will let operate its aquisitions independently?

dustypotato• 11 months ago

Why does it show me a cookie banner from Atlassian?

alexjplant• 11 months ago

...because they use Statuspage, an Atlassian product?

j454• 11 months ago

The cloud is someone else’s computer.

I wonder if self hosting is more reliable. How much does a private and firewalled git* instance need updates?

taude5• 11 months ago

Before gitlabs, github, etc. it was common to host your own code repos on-prem. The thing now, though, is that there's a lot of add-on functionality for how teams flow from using github over just hosting a git server.... so it's not really apples v oranges, anymore.

john01dav4• 11 months ago

You can use a self hosted forge, like gitea, forejo, or gitlab.

marcosdumay• 11 months ago

The thing now, though, is that there's a lot of add-on functionality

I don't get why people use those.

I understand free software projects that don't want to run any infrastructure, but why companies push their building and deployment out of premises when all you need is one trusted computer somewhere. Why do people insist on trusting cloud computers more than the ones they can kick?

j454• 11 months ago

Gitlab can handle a lot of CI/CD hosted locally for free that github actually charges for.

Git was originally local only too. People would run their own source code repos, it was trivial to run and maintain for the most part for most basic to intermediate use cases.

I had clients who insisted source code (mine or theirs) couldn't be on a public cloud provider. It's not that unreasonable or uncommon.

john01dav4• 11 months ago

I have gitea running in my basement. You can see how often it updates on the gitea github (since they don't self host since they haven't written an importer yet). You could automate this, but I haven't spent enough time updating to make that make sense.

numbsafari5• 11 months ago

If you just need a hosted git server, maintenance is mostly just making sure you have a proper storage/backup strategy in place.

If you want to self-host a code forge... start here: https://forgejo.org/docs/latest/admin/upgrade

homebrewer2• 11 months ago

Our gitea uptimes are measured in months. The only downtime is during non-working hours for upgrading gitea & the underlying OS, which take about 5 seconds of work and another 15 seconds of waiting for it to upgrade the database and restart.

j454• 11 months ago

That's great to hear, taking this downtime to install them all and try them out.

At the very least a few backups and mirrors running once I get them syncing.

tracker17• 11 months ago

If you don't need any features beyond a backup location for git, all you need is an SSH server with FS support. All you need is git on the remote server to initialize a server directory, and you can target that with git+ssh directly. Works well enough as a backup/mirror repository.

If you want to self-host for more features (CI/CD, PRs, etc.) there's GitLab, Gitea, and forgejo that I'm aware of. I think GitLab is a bit heavy duty for most self-hosting usage myself though. I actually appreciate the online/cloud and commercial options.

When you self-host, it becomes your job to fix it when it breaks.

j454• 11 months ago

Yup, as you mentioned, there's other alternatives to Gitlab lcaolly that are decent.

I'm finding myself liking and using gitlab more and more when I come back to it every 6-8 months.

I don't know how I'd be able to trust only a cloud for my source code and devops/CI/CD. At least a mirrored setup in a private or hybrid cloud on another provider as a failover that isn't with the same cloud provider.

ryandv2• 11 months ago

Funny, because just yesterday I was downvoted for pointing out (among other things) GitHub's less than stellar reliability these past few years.

When are the AI vibe coders going to create a GitHub replacement? With 1000x AI productivity a lean startup should easily outcompete the incumbents, no?

numbsafari5• 11 months ago

Yeah, especially if you deploy it on Azure...

gmerc• 11 months ago

Is this a good time to mention forgejo as a self hosted alternative?

numbsafari5• 11 months ago

It's a great time.

phkahler• 11 months ago

You got my attention, so why didn't you provide a link?

sigio3• 11 months ago

https://forgejo.org/ or https://codeberg.org/

jeltz6• 11 months ago

How does it compare to Gitlab?

dzogchen• 11 months ago

Much simpler. Much less features. Completely open source and not only the core.

yogsototh• 11 months ago

I host a forgejo instance and I feel it is great to embrace the distributed nature of git.

But be aware if you intend to host it you will need to protect it from recent AI web scrapers. I use anubis but there are other alternatives.

everfrustrated• 11 months ago

Enterprise customers, remember to email your sales rep and ask for them to report on their contracted uptime with you that you are allowed to do as per contract. They wont do this unless you ask hoping you don't notice the outages. It creates lots of internal pain - they have no automation internally for reporting on this.

This is the only way anything will ever change. GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS product. There's not a week whereby we aren't affected by an outage. Their reputation is mud.

petcat2• 11 months ago

GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS product.

Some of us are stuck using Atlassian and BitBucket and it is by far worse in every way.

__natty__• 11 months ago

Agree, atlassian products are much worse in terms of reliability.

hkt2• 11 months ago

Amen, BitBucket outages are regular and showstopping. Self hosting is genuinely more reliable.

sigio3• 11 months ago

It's also _by_far_ the cheapest, and most git-work can be done offline, so while it's inconvenient, it's not stopping all operations here.

weberer• 11 months ago

I've only had good experiences with Gitlab.

zemo4• 11 months ago

I used GitHub for years in the tech industry, then went into the games industry and used BitBucket and hated it, thought it was such a downgrade. Now I'm back in the tech industry and using GitHub, and I miss BitBucket.

at-fates-hands• 11 months ago

Isn't Sourcetree an Atlassian product? I used that for a while when my company outlawed Github and it seemed to do a good job.

throwzasdf• 11 months ago

Atlassian Jira and Confluence rock. Can't recall ever using BitBucket but Atlassians's products are top notch.

JanMa• 11 months ago

I used to maintain a self hosted instance of BitBucket and the user experience of it was actually very nice. We shut it down when Atlassian deprecated the self-hosted licenses. Moving to GitHub and GitHub Actions felt like a downgrade in more than a few ways

pmontra• 11 months ago

Two customers of mine have been using Bitbucket and other Atlassian products. I remember a problem a few months ago, nothing else. Maybe I've been lucky, no accesses during the outages.

mmcnl• 11 months ago

Bitbucket is quite nice actually. It's got very little bloat and just... works?

cddotdotslash• 11 months ago

Companies should automate this. Write their own outage monitoring, feed the results, plus the cumbersome format you have to send to the provider, into an LLM, have it spit out an email requesting SLA credits or whatever the contract specifies.

Probably not worth it for low cost services, but if you’re paying GitHub $x millions per year, maybe it is.

colechristensen2• 11 months ago

They intentionally underreport outages. Everybody does. When your performance metrics for your customers, managers, and individual contributors all include uptime, what you get isn't better uptime but lies about uptime.

colinbartlett• 11 months ago

Some customers of my product, StatusGator, do this with our API. They can extract the outage data -- including the time when we detect the outage before its acknowledged. And then use that to get SLA credits.

dehrmann2• 11 months ago

Obviously you should use a SaaS for SaaS uptime monitoring. No need to build this yourself.

RandallBrown• 11 months ago

I've had much better luck with GitHub than GitLab and whatever Atlassian is calling their source control these days.

Still sounds like good advice though.

sneak2• 11 months ago

The way you change this is not by pressuring Microsoft to be better or less of a shitty company.

The way that you change this is by switching to a different forge host, or by self-hosting Gitea.

I do so, and it’s simple and painless and cheap, and this quarter my uptime is better than this multinational’s.

xyst3• 11 months ago

this, but unfortunately many Fortune 500 are so deep in the MSFT stack. It would take many years to migrate off.

frmrghr• 11 months ago

Former githubber anon posting a non main acct

You all should be running a small private git

Most teams could get buy with something like a tiny instance with snapshots every commit

AWS has too much skin in the game to be as unreliable as they used to be.

There's zero reason for a startup to use all these services anymore. The only reason they ever existed was big government manipulation of the labor market through ZIRP

It's far more set n forget to self host git than github will be

xyst3• 11 months ago

All this does is make some poor offshore schmuck toil away for hours trying to get this data.

If companies begin to _cancel_ their contracts with MSFT/GH because of a breach of SLAs, then maybe conditions will improve.

Reality: companies locked into multi year deals with MSFT including a MSFT-shit suite and windows licenses.

Migrating away from it will be expensive. MS knows this. Thus the reason why nothing will change.

zulban2• 11 months ago

GitHub is _easily_ the most unreliable SaaS product.

I'm no fan of Microsoft either but when you say ridiculous things it's hard to take you seriously.

foobarchu• 11 months ago

Is it that much hyperbole, assuming we ignore small fry SaaS? I've personally noticed at least three outages in the last few weeks alone.

Sure it's less impactful than some services since you don't need access to the website at all times, but the reliability is still really bad.

ugh123• 11 months ago

Customers should also then compare what the sales guy is telling you to your own metrics, and see how far off they are.

ab71e5• 11 months ago

Ah was wondering why pull requests did not show up

gethly2• 11 months ago

I've always used Bitbucket as it allows private repositories, so Github was never something I wanted to use. But it is one of the most important websites in the world for tech people and should be run better than this, especially being now owned by the largest tech company in the world. On the other hand, it just shows that centralisation, or over-reliance on one thing or service, is always the worst idea. But people are very lazy and so we keep running in these circles ad infinitum.

clintonb• 11 months ago

Do you mean free private repos? GitHub has allowed free private repos for a few years now.

gethly2• 11 months ago

I have been using bitbucket before it got acquired by atlassian, which was in 2010, so i am sure github changed quite a bit since then. Even though i do have a github account, i don't use it for anything else other than creating or commenting on issues for other repos. So i have no clue about present day github capabilities as i am satisfied with bitbucket and had no need to explore github in depth.

masklinn• 11 months ago

Github switched from unlimited users and per-repo fees to unlimited private repositories and paying per-seat 10 years ago or so: https://github.blog/news-insights/product-news/introducing-u...

mattbruv2• 11 months ago

Man, I remember feeling like that change was somewhat recent. 10 years ago was about 2016. I'm not ready to accept this.

notnmeyer3• 11 months ago

anybody have a GH alternative they like? bonus points awarded for not being a straight clone of GH.

astrolx• 11 months ago

forgejo [1] works well for me. It can be self-hosted, otherwise e.g Codeberg [2] runs a good instance [2]

[1] https://forgejo.org/ [2] https://codeberg.org/

nerdypepper• 11 months ago

https://tangled.sh?

social features via atprotocol, native jujutsu support, stacked PRs, interdiffs, light weight to selfhost, nix-based CI.

notnmeyer3• 11 months ago

amazing

Aldipower3• 11 months ago

Gitlab of course. It's mature.

notnmeyer3• 11 months ago

how's the reliability been?

havkom• 11 months ago

Does this matter much? Git is a ”distributed source control system”. Are you using git in the wrong way? :)

tracker17• 11 months ago

Well, considering git is only version control, and github does much more... pull requests, social interaction, workers/workflows, ci/cd etc. It's kind of a big deal.

Unless you have some sort of decentralized method of doing CI/CD and pull requests I'm unaware of?

ngoldbaum• 11 months ago

I wonder why the github status page has an atlassian cookie request pop-up.

mbb70• 11 months ago

The status page is a SaaS product called StatusPage, acquired by Atlassian in 2016.

taude5• 11 months ago

git was designed as a distributed vcs for high-latency connected developers with plenty of ability to work offline.

I don't think I've really been impacted by any of the outages. Maybe I wait an extra hour to merge a feature or something, in which case I actually get to eat lunch and browse HN, doesn't feel quite as catastrophic for me, as some of you.

petcat2• 11 months ago

The problem is that people design their entire development and release lifecyle to be dependent on Github. A lot of times they can't even push code hotfixes to production without it. It's a terrible SPOF for a lot of engineering orgs.

taude5• 11 months ago

The hotfixes makes sense.

lucb1e2• 11 months ago

We also started having customers since a few years that declare GitHub fully trusted, as in, it is simply not worth considering what the impact would be if that vendor gets compromised. I can't name names, but this includes a vendor that aims to prevent supply chain attacks (technically language-agnostic; in practice aiming to be the solution chosen by one of the biggest programming language's package manager)

can't even push code hotfixes to production without it. It's a terrible SPOF

GitHub's availability impact is the least of my concerns these days. It'll be a really tough year for society worldwide if we need to rebuild loads of infrastructure after some threat actor got into github and managed to change key pieces of code without being detected a couple of years. Having seen how hospitals handle updates, they might get lucky and be old enough to not be affected yet, or have a really tough time recovering due to understaffed IT

No clue how to even begin solving this since our OSes are likely all pulling dependencies from GitHub without verification of the developer's PGP key, if the project even has that and applies it correctly. I guess I can only recommend being aware of the problem and doing what you can in your own organization to reduce the impact

dymk• 11 months ago

GitHub is everything in addition to the git hosting. Issue tracking, code review, CI, artifact hosting, wiki+docs, kanban board.

taude5• 11 months ago

That makes sense, I wasn't sure how "all in" everyone is on these other features that are only github centric.

koiueo• 11 months ago

GitHub isn't just git, it's also a CI, a project management tool/issues tracker...

Joe_Cool• 11 months ago

It also has pretty neat support for emailing patches. And it's practically impossible to lose data as long as any single dev still has an intact .git directory.

Nobody is preventing the devs from just setting up a second "upstream" and pushing to both github and gitlab (for example) or any other service at the same time.

adobrawy• 11 months ago

In meantime, I recommend to read their availability reports on their blog, published monthly: https://github.blog/news-insights/company-news/

bob1029• 11 months ago

I've been working on a self-hosted alternative to GitHub and I am curious what HN finds to be the most important features. I think Code, Issues and PRs are the critical aspects, but I don't know what typical workflows look like for others these days.

It seems like there are some teams that have figured out a way to turn GH into a labyrinth of CI/CD actions that allegedly produces a ton of business value, but I don't know how typical this kind of use case is. If the average GH user just needs the essentials, I could easily focus those verticals down and spend more time on things like SAML/OIDC, reporting APIs, performance, etc. I suspect there aren't a whole lot of developers who are finding things like first party AI integration to be indispensable.

justinrubek• 11 months ago

I don't think it's the features that are lacking from the alternatives. It's the network effects.

iN7h33nD• 11 months ago

Have you seen: https://forgejo.org/

neilv• 11 months ago

I like what I've used of Forgejo (Git, Issues+Board, Wiki), and have hosted it on servers and localhost easily. I haven't tried its CI features yet.

Codeberg is a cloud site for open source projects that runs Forgejo.

Forgejo is a fork of Gitea, which is another option, especially if you want commercial support, but I haven't tried it yet.

I also kinda like GitLab, both the cloud one and the enterprise on-prem version. And their issue label features work more easily with the board than Forgejo's (automatically moving issues between columns based on scoped labels). Though their pricing tiers have been unfortunate at times (I don't know latest).

gazook89• 11 months ago

Any time I see this topic brought up, two things are always mentioned: the "hub" part, meaning the discoverability and social aspect, and the "network effect" of having everyone use a single service (so everyone already has an account and they don't have to create additional account for every self-hosted project.

tracker17• 11 months ago

Agreed, it's definitely the network cohesion that keeps GH together. Especially for FLOSS. For advanced features, there are some niceties that say Azure DevOps offers that GH Enterprise still lacks, though it feels like there's some convergence on the backend.

I like GH Actions myself, though sometimes it can get a little cumbersome with self-hosted workers on private/enterprise projects. I'm a big fan of automation and like to keep related bits closer together. As opposed to alternatives that have completely detached workflows/deployments.

sneak2• 11 months ago

I use and love Gitea. Why not contribute to that or the other fork vs making another?

sashank_15093• 11 months ago

I’m at Google, we have a million + file codebase. Every piece of code is snapshotted (no need to commit, automatic snapshot whenever a change is made). Every line of code has its own unique URL (this is for your branch too, not just overall). Background tests running nonstop hourly. Never seen any downtime. The infra at Google is insane

chaz6• 11 months ago

Without manual commits, is there any way to record the intention of each change?

sashank_15093• 11 months ago

Yes you can still commit as a logical delineation of changes. And every commit is automatically a PR, folding multiple commits is possible but not the common workflow, they prefer just reviewing and approving each commit.

Balinares• 11 months ago

There are manual commits, they're just called changelists.

sequin• 11 months ago

GitHub is a completely different scale. If Google hadn't wasted its opportunities to become the prime source code platform they'd also have issues.

sashank_15093• 11 months ago

That’s what I disagree with, I think Google codebase scale is massive. It has android + chrome + Google + Waymo + tensorflow etc, this is a lot of code. And also consider that every third party library is put inside Google3 codebase too, there are no truly external dependencies, all the code is there in one repo, with their version one version principle. I think Google is roughly similar scale to GitHub and is managing things far better

CoderJoshDK• 11 months ago

With continued reliability issues and the CEO stepping down, now feels like such an opportune time for a competitor to start taking market share. I sure am rooting for it!

For the longest time, I thought that there was absolutely no way for some of these corner stone companies (slash tech) to be toppled. And I’m very impressed with their ability to destroy consumer trust!

colechristensen2• 11 months ago

Sadly gitlab lacked focus especially on software quality.

shrinks99• 11 months ago

Between Tangled, GitLab, Codeburg (Forgejo), and Gitea there's quite a lot of decent alternatives now compared to when GitHub first sold to MS. Having the entire world of FOSS integrated in one development platform was convenient but I'm more excited by the possibilities for more innovation in the space.

Lammy• 11 months ago

And Phorge! (former Phabricator, and my favorite) https://we.phorge.it/

alphazard• 11 months ago

Everyone impacted by this outage should take a look at Radicle, which was also on the front page today.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44874945

I'm not affiliated with Radicle in any way. I am just impressed with the technology.

joshred• 11 months ago

Sooo....

What's the consensus on gitlab?

tracker17• 11 months ago

I've used their public site for a few private projects, mostly in habit from when private projects in GH were limited to paid accounts. The collaboration was a bit better at that time imo.

I'm not sure that I would choose it for self-hosting over gitea, forgejo or straight up ssh+git on a remote system, which works well enought for a personal backup target.

mattbruv2• 11 months ago

This is just embarrassing for them, especially whoever is in charge of pull requests.

sigio3• 11 months ago

Just completed one or our (quarterly) github exports before this hit... If people are looking into extracting everything from their organisations, i've published the scripts I use: https://github.com/sigio/github-export

irthomasthomas• 11 months ago

Any one else smile for a moment when they saw their issues list empty? Don't rush to fix it ;)

gdcbe• 11 months ago

Maybe they should focus less on "agentic" and more on just keeping their core product solid... I suppose that doesn't rhyme with growth at all cost... zzz sad... it is

asim• 11 months ago

Too many unnecessary features at this point perhaps. Self hosting might be a good alternative. Don't need the UI.

JyB• 11 months ago

I’m really wondering what internally causes this. No one likes it when they have outages, but it keeps happening. Is this a culture thing? Like pressure to ship features fast? Some under staffed teams or lack of ownership on some crucial components?

tracker17• 11 months ago

Definitely all good questions. I've noticed that there seems to be a bit of convergence between Azure DevOps and Github (Enterprise) and am curious how co-mingled the teams or management are at any given level or not.

I'm mixed on the cultural changes at MS and have historically preferred GH's approach. I'm hoping MS moves closer to GH than the reverse. I'm not working with/at either company and don't really have a lot of insights to offer other than observations from the outside.

Seb-C• 11 months ago

GitHub is implemented in Ruby (on Rails), and now there is apparently a strong internal push from Microsoft to code everything using AIs/LLMs.

IMO mixing a dynamically typed language, a framework based on magic conventions and vibe coding sounds like the perfect recipe for a disaster.

jewel• 11 months ago

I used to work at a place that had a second copy of all the git repositories on a server, available over ssh. We could push there and then, at deploy time, instruct the servers to pull from that repo instead of bitbucket.

If I were to set up the same thing again today, I'd add some automation to automatically keep it in sync with github as well as automate the servers so that they'd attempt to pull from both on every deploy.

I share this as an idea for those who need an emergency or backup deploy mechanism.

yoyohello13• 11 months ago

Just saying. Our company has been on self-hosted Gitlab for years. We have one devops guy who spends like an hour a month managing the server. Never one outage.

jonator• 11 months ago

If you're reading this there's a great opportunity to pull a Linear move and disrupt the entrenched players with a 10x better UX. Although the hardest nut to crack here are the network effects.

demarq• 11 months ago

What’s the hardest part of making a git hosting service?

Culonavirus• 11 months ago

There's a book about this. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9211847-how-hard-can-it-...

Aldipower3• 11 months ago

Used and using Gitlab with success in all of my companies. It is maybe a bit boring and a little bit slow, but it is enterprise and has everything you need. Included time on the market..

e-dant• 11 months ago

I like github

WhyNotHugo2• 11 months ago

The linked page doesn’t say much. Just “increased latency”. No more details than that. Am I missing something?

alfiedotwtf• 11 months ago

Didn’t GitHub fire a bunch of developers recently because AI was a silver bullet?

GitHub was having issues

Related Stories