Github experiencing major service outages across all services.

http://status.github.com/#

by experiment0 • 14 years ago

181 143 14 years ago

status.github.com

experiment03• 14 years ago

A little bit more info here:

https://status.github.com/messages

lacosaes0• 14 years ago

And this is why I use Google Code: supports git and is more reliable than Github.

It's a shame that they don't offer a paid service for closed-source software.

rplnt• 14 years ago

Were there any issues with Github prior to this? I don't recall any aws-like pattern. But I might have just missed it.

cdelsolar• 14 years ago

Github is awesome, but yeah, they've been having lots of outages for a while now. A deploy based on a git fetch && git reset from Github might not be a good thing.

kordless• 14 years ago

A few. They lost a server about 10 days ago which took down a few repos including some gists. All in its been very stable.

tzaman2• 14 years ago

Where do you live, under a rock? Of course they offer paid service for closed-source software.

stock_toaster2• 14 years ago

Indeed. Not only do they offer a paid service and private repos, but they offer a paid self-host version as well.

cmelbye• 14 years ago

I'm assuming by "they" he was referring to Google Code. (Wishing that Google Code offered a paid service.)

jtchang• 14 years ago

This is why I love git (and distributed version control systems in general). For the most part a short downtime isn't the end of the world. When it comes back up I'll push my changes and that'll be that.

shoopy• 14 years ago

I can do the same thing with CVS?

msbarnett4• 14 years ago

You can't branch, commit, checkout previous versions, etc while the server is down.

He can.

angersock• 14 years ago

You're kidding, right? Might as well say you can do the same thing with diff, rsync, and cron.

callahad• 14 years ago

Exactly. I'm sitting here thinking "poor GitHub engineers" rather than "oh crap, how am I going to work?"

(Though I do wish GitHub Issues weren't as centralized...)

kmfrk2• 14 years ago

Yup. I wanted to do some coding before heading off, but I guess that's off the table now.

rwg• 14 years ago

One of the neat things about repos in Fossil (the DVCS by drh of SQLite fame) is that they have a built-in wiki and issue tracker whose contents are version controlled along with everything else in a project's repo. The Fossil executable also has a built-in web server that presents a web interface for working with the repo, including the issue tracker and wiki.

In short, if you have a project's Fossil repo, you can work on everything locally, then push source, wiki, and issue tracker changes to a central repo at your leisure.

silverbax882• 14 years ago

I would point out that both TFS and Mercurial do the same thing (as does ClearCase, but ClearCase is awwwful), but with much less memory consumption on the local PC. Not trying to add snark (I upvoted the above comment), just adding that it's not a GitHub feature.

msbarnett4• 14 years ago

> I would point out that both TFS and Mercurial do the same thing (as does ClearCase, but ClearCase is awwwful), but with much less memory consumption on the local PC. Not trying to add snark (I upvoted the above comment), just adding that it's not a GitHub feature.

Well, no, obviously it's a feature of Distributed Version Control Systems in general.

In fact, that's probably why OP wrote "This is why I love git (and distributed version control systems in general)" and didn't in any way claim it was a feature of GitHub?

And do you have some kind of reference for git being less memory-efficient (are you talking RAM-wise?) vs Mercurial or TFS? On its face its pretty hard to believe; git is pretty light-weight.

drivebyacct24• 14 years ago

Last time I used TFS it would take 5, literally 5 minutes to time out for checkouts. The way TFS acts I don't even feel it's accurate to call it a DVCS.

The only SCM I like less than TFS is SourceDepot. The bane of my existence. It's sad when I can rant about it abstractly and my father can sympathize.

jeltz• 14 years ago

Your comment looks just like snark to me since 1) the parent comment mentioned other distributed systems and 2) a random unreferenced jab at git for its allegedly bad memory consumption. I have no idea if it is true or not, but it is hardly relevant to the discussion.

tkellogg• 14 years ago

> For the most part a short downtime isn't the end of the world

Unless the Mayans were off by one

drunkpotato• 14 years ago

Exactly. To expand on this point, I love the redundancy built into Git.

I had a clone of my personal fork of my department's github repository at home. I read this and thought "that's interesting, I wonder if I could still work on it from home if I want to." I saw with "git config -l" that I had my github repository and my university's github repository, but not my university's mirror of the repository. I did a "git add remote", logged in to my university's VPN, "git fetch", and was up and running with my latest changes from Friday.

If that didn't make any sense, well, the gist of it is that the outage wouldn't affect development work in the slightest, thanks to the fact that every repository is a) content addressable, so you have consistency between servers and b) self-contained, so you have a complete copy everywhere. Hit me up for more info if you're curious; I recently upgraded us from CVS to Git for this redundancy advantage, among others.

saurik2• 14 years ago

While I actually agree with you, as I look at GitHub as "somewhat reasonable git hosting", that is not how many (if not even most) projects actually use the website, so it is an unfair analysis: people seriously often use (and even encourage others to use) GitHub as the only web presence for their project, using a Readme.md to build a landing page; meanwhile, for many people, GitHub is how they handle incoming bug reports and pull requests (as they believe, for right or for wrong, that it is easier to use GitHub to collaborate on these features than a more traditional mailing list).

You thereby can't just say "oh yeah, git is distributed, so I don't care if GitHub is offline"; it makes about as much sense as saying "I don't care that Gmail is offline, as email is distributed: I have all my messages locally in Outlook and can send mail through my ISP" while ignoring that other people now can't send you mail and you have lost access to your calendar entirely.

jbverschoor• 14 years ago

emm.. it IS exactly the point.

Webservers can become unavailable. Github has a great trackrecord, and because git is distributed, people can still commit their code locally.

If you would have an SVN workflow, you would either have to wait committing (which is costly), or commit multiple changes in one go.

Also the email example is exactly the same. It IS a good thing you can access stuff locally.

You basically tell that dropbox is useless.

aliukani• 14 years ago

I spent the downtime trying to figure out how to use Jade without the documentation available -- the docs are in the readme.md on the Github repo. It was only later that I realized that the docs were also available through npm (https://npmjs.org/package/jade), but it was an interesting experience nonetheless.

vacipr• 14 years ago

Good.I was starting to miss "Github is down" submissions. Quick let's look for alternatives.

cagenut• 14 years ago

That's a really nice status dashboard, tracking and publicly displaying your 98th% is really cool. On the other hand stuff like this:

"13:17 UTC We are seeing unicorns ..."

Comes off as un-professional at exactly the wrong moment.

tinco4• 14 years ago

How is that un-professional? Unicorns mean errors for github, and they report them.

This is more professional reporting than most companies do.

recursive• 14 years ago

> Unicorns mean errors for github

I have no idea what this means, but I can see how the idea of coming up with an alternate language in which fantasy creatures represent things we already have established words for might seem unprofessional

shadowmint• 14 years ago

Can't disagree more.

Gives me the impression there are actually real people trying to fix things, not just blank-faced robo admins following company policy HOWTO-Fix guides.

That github isn't a blank sheet devoid of life and emotion and all 'professional' is the reason I'm willing to shrug off downtime like this.

If anything, I really feel for whoever posted:

   We do not expect this to have visible impact to 
   customers, but will update status if that changes.

Ouch. You never ever want to follow that up with a post in red.

chacha1022• 14 years ago

Hopefully it means that they thoroughly thought this through before planning the maintenance, and through their due diligence, they concluded that customers shouldn't see any problems, and thus decided to go forward.

Just shows people aren't perfect. Haven't we all been there?

(I do agree though that it does feel like a slap in the face to say: "Hey there shouldn't be any problems! Never mind, we were wrong...")

ricardobeat3• 14 years ago

Unicorns are the illustration for server error pages.

pragone• 14 years ago

Likewise - I haven't the slightest idea what "unicorns" are in this context.

glanotte• 14 years ago

unicorn is their web server for rails. http://unicorn.bogomips.org/

syncsynchalt3• 14 years ago

The github error page is an angry unicorn. Similar to ars technica's moonshark, or twitter's failwhale.

jeffbarr• 14 years ago

Come on, really?

Did you ever have a piece of code that should be impossible to reach under normal conditions? Did you put a message there to remind yourself that the case in question should never, ever occur?

That could be a unicorn.

For extra credit, if you have put these messages in your code, have you seen all of them at one time or another? I certainly have!

csense6• 14 years ago

Other posters have noted where the terminology comes from.

But you should really learn to take the meaning of an unknown term from context if you don't know what it means.

As for the accusations of unprofessionalism -- I'll take vivid metaphor [1] like "seeing unicorns" over a dull monotone description like "our site is experiencing server errors."

[1] As other replies have pointed out, in this case it's not a metaphor; people are (or were, as the case may be) literally staring at pictures of unicorns.

zaidf• 14 years ago

May be just a matter of preference but for me "our site is experiencing server errors" is much clearer communication than "seeing unicorns." The latter requires me to learn a new terminology in a high pressure environment for no good reason.

And if "seeing unicorns" was a code word for a specific kind of errors, then again I would rather have a more descriptive terminology and not one that I may confuse for an inside joke.

paukul• 14 years ago

Github switched to the Unicorn server (http://unicorn.bogomips.org) some time ago. Sorry if you don't like the name but, uhm well, it's the name of the server they use. Anyways. Error pages featured an "angry unicorn" since then, so when they are saying "we are seeing unicorns", most users know that this translates to errors..

jzwinck2• 14 years ago

You say most users will know what it means. Do the rest not deserve a readable status page?

pretoriusB2• 14 years ago

>Comes off as un-professional at exactly the wrong moment.

No, adding a touch of humor is highly professional, not to mention good marketing.

Remember, they are not marketing to enterprise managers, rural Utah programmers, or corporate 80's programmers in suits, but to todays and tomorrows "hip" programmers.

Now, some of today's programmers arguably square and adhere to BS 50's professionalism ideas (where professional = boring, somber and well groomed) but most would take the unicorns over any kind of "professional" copy text.

tzaman2• 14 years ago

I guess Murphy is strong on this one, I was just right in the middle of bringing up new server (to host Rails app). Oh well, I'll go to bed early :D

rolleiflex4• 14 years ago

Well handled, minus the unicorns. Tangentially relevant: I just wish Github offered some sort of an academic plan for students, no private repo means that I cannot use Github at all not because I'm building closed-source software, but because I (obviously) can't put my assignment work for public viewing before the assignment deadline. So I've been using Bitbucket, which is fine and all, but I would have loved to be a part of Github community.

ricardobeat3• 14 years ago

Five dollars...

You can also commit locally, and only push after the deadline.

experiment03• 14 years ago

They do offer a free plan for students. I get 5 free private repos.

I can't get the link now since GitHub is down ha, but when it's back up, just have a quick google and you'll find a quick form to fill in and voila. It's great.

drivebyacct24• 14 years ago

It's actually a discount. That way you can have a better account for $5 less each month. Although I should probably go turn that off having just graduated.

lee337• 14 years ago

Once the current issues are resolved, students can sign up for a free GitHub micro account (5 free private repositories with unlimited collaborators) via https://github.com/edu. You just need a verified, valid-looking email address i.e. joe@stanford.edu, jim@strath.ac.uk, etc.

psobot• 14 years ago

Github does have academic plans. When I signed up, it was 2 years of a free Micro plan (5 private repos) if you signed up with a verified school email address. When they're back up, check out: https://github.com/edu

gst• 14 years ago

You mean something like this? https://github.com/edu

pcerioli2• 14 years ago

I use both bitbucket.org (for unlimited private repos) and github (for public repos). You are not limited to use only one of them.

csense6• 14 years ago

If you want free Git hosting, you can DIY with Gitlab [1] if you want a web-based GUI like Github's.

If you prefer command-line usage, I'd recommend Gitolite [2]. It allows you to give people access to git and only git (as opposed to git's built-in system, which requires granting ssh shell access); and it only uses one OS-level user/group regardless of how many people it's managing.

Either of the above solutions are for your compsci professors who are clued-in enough to be comfortable with CLI in general and Git in particular.

If you're trying to give files to technically clueless humanities professors, I'd suggest only using Git privately, to develop your paper or whatever, then using a plain old email attachment, or hosting on an HTTP server, to submit the assignment. Or going really old-school by printing out an old-fashioned dead-tree hardcopy.

Of course, all of these solutions (except email attachments and printouts) require running your own server, which is actually a great learning experience. I'd recommend prgmr.com for hosting; their smallest plans should be able to fit even an undergrad's budget, and you have full root access to your (Xen VM) system, so you can do all kinds of fun and exotic experiments. It's not necessary for basic usage, but you can install any version of any Linux distro, use LVM, even use a custom-compiled kernel or FreeBSD (the only requirement is guest Xen patches). It's great because if you have problems, they give you access to an ssh-based out-of-band console, rebooter, and rescue image so you can fix them yourself. (By contrast, many other hosts require you to make changes through some half-baked web UI that lacks half the tools you need, require you to install only approved distros and only do OS upgrades on an approved schedule, and require you to file tickets with lengthy turnaround times and/or fees in order to do the most routine troubleshooting or maintenance tasks.)

Disclaimer: My only relationship with prgmr.com is that I've been their hosting customer for a long time (and very happy with them given the nonsense I've had to put up with from other hosts, in case you couldn't figure that part out from my above rant).

My only relationship with Gitolite is a project user. (I've created and maintained three small-scale Gitolite installations.)

I haven't used Gitlab, but I've heard good things about it.

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4957145

[2] https://github.com/sitaramc/gitolite

h2s• 14 years ago

How fitting that one of the links you've posted is unavailable at the moment due to the very downtime that caused this discussion! Evidence of our over-reliance on GitHub in the open source community, perhaps.

rolleiflex4• 14 years ago

> Either of the above solutions are for your compsci professors who are clued-in enough to be comfortable with CLI in general and Git in particular.

I'm a visual design student, and most of my professors are clued in enough to know how to handle git. I'm lucky on that regard.

>Of course, all of these solutions (except email attachments and printouts) require running your own server, which is actually a great learning experience.

I do have my own VPS, Amazon AWS. I just dumped in an ubuntu server image, LAMP stack and python, and it's just vanilla unix after that—it's great. I'll check prgmr out though, thanks for the recommendation.

Gitlab looks good, but I almost exclusively use git CLI, so I don't need a fancy interface. I'll take a look at gitolite. Thanks!

bencevans2• 14 years ago

GitHub do provide Edu accounts, I have one! I guess I went to github.com/edu or /education or something but it gave me the form at /contact, you say what your up to, where you go and such and they put a coupon on your account to give you a free micro plan.

rtkwe2• 14 years ago

BitBucket. It's essentially the same service as GitHub, but allows private repositories for free. And with an academic .edu email you get unlimited collaborators. Much simpler than running your own git server as others have suggested I think.

rolleiflex4• 14 years ago

> BitBucket. It's essentially the same service as GitHub, but allows private repositories for free. And with an academic .edu email you get unlimited collaborators. Much simpler than running your own git server as others have suggested I think.

> So I've been using Bitbucket, which is fine and all, but I would have loved to be a part of Github community.

I already have Bitbucket edu plan, as I've said. It's pretty great, but it lacks community.

zemanel5• 14 years ago

What about a script/service to mirror Bitbucket and Github (or others) through webhooks or etc?

Was just getting my hands on Homebrew after a fresh OS install when i hit the Octobummer :-/

ricardobeat3• 14 years ago

You can push to both at the same time, no need for hooks.

zalew3• 14 years ago

.git/config

    [remote "bitbucket"]
	url = git@bitbucket.org:you/repo.git
	fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/bitbucket/*

$ git push bitbucket

//edit after tinco's comment

+refs/heads/:refs/remotes/origin/ -> +refs/heads/:refs/remotes/bitbucket/

zemanel5• 14 years ago

Ah but i meant a global service for public repos, instead of each owner setting up manually

tinco4• 14 years ago

That snippet overrides your remotes/origin branch with what you pull from bitbucket.

This might not be what you want. Instead you probably should do:

  fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/bitbucket/*

Unless you really know what you're doing and are just crazy like that :)

rubynerd3• 14 years ago

I'm amazed at how much this has knocked me on my arse.

I first attempted to redo the README for a service I've just open-sourced, before realising Github is down.

Then, I attempted to fix the company CI server (OOM errors because of Carrierwave needing more than 500MB of memory to run 1 spec in, for some unknown reason), which failed because it couldn't check out the code.

After giving up on that, I attempted to install Graphite to a company server, where I hit another roadblock because the downloads are hosted on Github, and so I had to use Launchpad, which I had an allergic reaction to.

Also, when I was shelling into the server, oh-my-zsh failed to update because, you guessed it, Github was down.

Still, shouts to the ops team in the trenches, we're rooting for you.

tinco4• 14 years ago

Your company runs its source revisions through Github without a backup solution? Do you really put all your eggs in a basket you have no control over?

I know that in theory a cloud solution should have a higher uptime than an amateuristic set up private server, but cloud solutions have a certain complexity and coherence that make them very vulnerable to these kinds of 'full failures' where nothing is in your control.

Maybe you should take this time to learn from this, and analyze what you could do to reduce the impact of this failure. For example, you could research what it would take for your company to move to another Git provider, perhaps even on your own server or a VM slice at some cloud provider.

I'm not saying you should drop github, because obviously they have great service, but be realistic about cloud service.

Cloud service is like RAID: it is not a backup.

The way RAID is nice for recovering from errors without downtime, there is a chance something bigger happens and you still lose your data cloud is nice for offering scalability and availability but there's a chance everything goes down and you still can't run your operations.

ghshephard• 14 years ago

Add up your downtime over a three year period by relying on Git (or gmail, or AWS) versus the cost of trying to engineer some local-backup system, and the downtime associated with that going awry.

Outages happens - as long as we're talking hours a year, pretty much everyone but life-safety systems, critical infrastructure, and payment/high-traffic commerce sites are probably better off just letting third-party cloud vendors manage their systems. Take the downtime and relax.

(Now, if downtime consistently gets into the 10s of hours/year, it's time to look for a new cloud provider. )

rubynerd3• 14 years ago

* Git is decentralised, if Github drops off the face of the earth, it will take the two of us about half an hour to fix it as we each have a copy of the codebase on our laptops.

* If I wanted the build server to point to our internal git mirror, I would configure it to point to our internal code mirror, but I want it to build off of Github webhooks.

* The "eggs in the basket" analogy is probably best saved for a situation where I'm dependant on a cloud service, such as Twilio.

* I would expect an amateuristic private server to have better uptime than a monolithic service such as Github because there are a lot less moving parts, and in our case, a lot less people doing things with it.

* The "company impact" of Github going down is next to nil. It's one o'clock in the morning on a Sunday, I'm eating string cheese, and I feel like being productive. The company is not paying me for this, and have encountered zero losses from it. We have a very simple mirror which we can use to push code to production if Github goes down, which we have never actually had to use.

Personally, I find the "keep a torch in every corner of every room because for 15 minutes last year the power was out" attitude to life is a bit over-rated, and you're planning for an edge case. I'd much rather remember where the torch is and learn to walk in the dark.

rb2k_• 14 years ago

> Your company runs its source revisions through Github without a backup solution?

Thanks to git, every developer usually has a complete backup of the repository + all of its history

darkchasma• 14 years ago

I never forget to pull before going remote, and today I did, and the one time I actually need github to be up and it's not. But I can't be upset, even if this wasn't my fault, it's github.

revskill2• 14 years ago

Most of developers in my countries 're using SVN. I don't use SVN at all, and i'm failing to convince my partner that Git is better than SVN, just because i don't believe in hardware stability.

johnny22• 14 years ago

use git-svn.

kcbanner2• 14 years ago

What does hardware stability have to do with it?

revskill2• 14 years ago

I mean the harddisk or mainboard could go wrong anytime. The Distributed model seems more stable.

niggler• 14 years ago

What's funny is the extent to which Github is being used as a centralized repository for many projects. I don't just mean for project discovery; the issues and gists and other services aren't replicated as often or easily as the code.

In fact, a lot of services depend on github for various reasons, all of which are probably borked now ...

robomartin• 14 years ago

I did a bunch of work on GitHub today just before it went down. Talk about getting lucky.

I'm sure we will all learn a bunch from the post-mortem. These high-profile and very openly discussed failures are always good for learning all kinds of things.

No issues at all on how GitHub is handling it so far. Eager to learn what happened. Hitting refresh on the status page every so often. Better than watching underwater basket-weaving competition at the olympics.

syncsynchalt3• 14 years ago

I created a new org on GitHub today (through all the unicorns) and was about to push an existing repo to them so we could all start pulling it. Talk about unlucky.

kh_hk3• 14 years ago

The good part is you can do it yourself without GitHub (which, after the downtime, could come into the equation quite easily):

  -- Remote machine, or SSH port forwarded machine --
    > adduser git (you either add pusher/puller's ssh pubkeys to its 
      authorized_hosts, or use a shared password)
    > su git
    > cd ~
    > git init --bare myproject.git

  -- Your local repo --
    > git remote add <name> git@aforementionedmachine:myproject.git 
    > git push <name>

Setting up a git repo for confidential pushing and pulling is quite easy.

rossjudson• 14 years ago

Can't read the clojure 1.5 RC1 release notes. Damn.

Looks like services implemented in terms of github are not reliable (but there was no guarantee of that anyway).

fomojola• 14 years ago

Interesting: Github Pages is still up (got a blog on there and it doesn't appear to have experienced any outages). Static site generators for the win.

buttscicles• 14 years ago

Pages was out briefly a couple of hours ago (certainly some repos, anyway)

Seems to be fine now though.

timothybone• 14 years ago

I feel like such an uber goober! I was installing a package that relied on a github file, which for obvious reasons failed....little did i realize that that was the problem, all I saw was such and such python error callback....doh!

csense6• 14 years ago

It should be pretty far down their list of priorities at this point, but I just noticed the "Exception Percentage" value at https://status.github.com/graphs/past_day is saying 483.704%. The fact that they're measuring this in percentages implies the maximum is 100%, but this isn't so.

chuhnk• 14 years ago

I imagine it was a percent measured against successful responses. The exceptions now far exceed those successful responses. You are correct in saying it should be 100% but people have a habit of scaling beyond it.

csense6• 14 years ago

If this is in fact how they're measuring...I was going to make this post a long rant about how ridiculous it is to measure it in that way, but then I realized that people do sometimes measure probabilities by quoting the win-to-loss or loss-to-win ratio.

This is called "odds" and frequently used in gambling. Usually, though, someone says "4.7 to 1" or "47 to 10" (abbreviated 4.7:1 or 47:10) instead of 470%. Usually the larger number is stated first, and the direction is usually indicated by a word like "favorite" or "longshot." So one would say "Errors seem to be a 4.7:1 favorite today."

It's slightly complicated by the fact that odds can measure one of several things:

A. A probability ratio ("Red" is a slight underdog in the game of roulette [1]; the odds against hitting it are 20:18 since there are 20 non-red spaces and 18 red spaces)

B. A payout ratio ("Red" pays 1:1, meaning the prize if you win this bet is equal to the amount of the bet)

C. The current payout of a paramutuel pool [2]

Odds are seldom used outside of a gambling context.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roulette

[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parimutuel_betting

cjbprime• 14 years ago

It's back now.

pcerioli2• 14 years ago

GitHub outage is now over.

23david• 14 years ago

Time to fork github. Bad bad sign that they can't get their operations in order. I guess $100 Million can't buy you uptime...

rdl• 14 years ago

I'm curious what actually went wrong.

greggman• 14 years ago

I'm really curious how much longer github can offer so much free service. It's not just git but effectively free web hosting as well, at least for statically served pages.

It seems like it's only a matter of time before something will have to give. Either they'll have to start throttling web serving or cover the site in ads like sourceforge or something

I guess I'd better sign up and start paying ASAP to help be part of the solution

robin_reala• 14 years ago

Plenty of companies pay GitHub multiple thousands of dollars a year for their services. It’s not just personal accounts.

jamescun• 14 years ago

I don't think GitHub's hosting of free repositories costs them that much. As you said yourself, it is just essentially free hosting so the largest cost will probably be storage (which is pretty cheap anyway now) and then the much minor cost of Push/Pull/Clone etc bandwidth and processing.

Think of it less as a free service and think of it more as marketing. I have a few free repos which I used to open source some of my personal modules; however when it came time to select a source revisioning service for work, I remembered how easy GitHub was and went with their payed service. I am fairly sure us now paying for our repositories offset itself and my and quite a few other free repositories.

kcbanner2• 14 years ago

Github is used by large enterprises.

pjungwir2• 14 years ago

It's easy enough to set up a backup repo so a team can keep collaborating when Github is down, but does anyone have a way to deploy Rails apps with Capistrano+bundler? It's terrible not being able to deploy; sometimes that can be really urgent.

With Cap I can just repoint config/deploy.rb to the backup git repo, but what about bundler?

pjungwir2• 14 years ago

To answer my own question:

    http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8693319/where-can-i-install-gems-from-when-rubygems-org-is-down

Of course if you have private patches of gems with bundler's `:git` option, you'd need to repoint all of those, too (as well as keep them in two places).

It'd be awesome if there was some simpler way, maybe a separate declaration in your Gemfile so that any gems added to your project also get installed on a corporate git server, and then bundler uses that as a fallback if `source` doesn't work.

tronicron• 14 years ago

Solution is to self-host your critical files. If you have SSH already on a server (ha!) it is pretty easy:

http://www.verbosity.ca/hosting-your-own-git-based-shared-re...

Github experiencing major service outages across all services.

Related Stories