It's driven by aggregated user complaints, so it's pretty high-quality. Comment counts are a proxy for "how bad was the outage" + "how long was the outage thread topical for".
It bugs me how there can be an acknowledged live incident happening today with Actions, and yet down the page where it shows last 30d uptime for actions, today's little rectangle is a chipper green.
Isn't that why most people are on GitHub in the first place ? Which then, Windows style eventually turns into people wanting to use GitHub also for company work, where the real money comes from for GitHub.
Without free CI in GitHub, you might as well say:
"they can just shut the whole thing down and this reliability issue will be solved immediately"
Maybe it is, but I know that lots of us used GitHub way before Actions launched. I think even if Actions wasn't free, GitHub would still have a massive advantage because it is the most well known place to host code, especially by less technical users (which is where I see a lot of finger pointing going with the increase in GitHub usage).
I would not be surprised if a serious amount of this usage is not user-intended and instead the LLM just inserts some sort of CI job off the bat and people roll with it.
I've heard this claimed dozens of times. I wonder if anyone at Github can confirm this theory and maybe give insight into why they haven't just done this?
Nice graphic on that page of a bunch of cartoon workers tending to what looks like a Rube Goldberg contraption. It's all just lighthearted fun and games.
We use a self hosted gitlab-ce instance which has pretty high up time running on a 10 year old server (and its backup)
Takes a few minutes a month to update and babysit. We only basically use the CI and the repository functionality though so gitlab has been "feature complete" for us for a while. Probably I we could swap to something like gitea or forgeo but the gitlab CI seems like a nice balance between powerful when it needs to be and simple otherwise for our use case so there is nothing driving us to swap.
https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=githubstatus.com
It's driven by aggregated user complaints, so it's pretty high-quality. Comment counts are a proxy for "how bad was the outage" + "how long was the outage thread topical for".
Disclaimer: I am building a code forge myself at https://juju.bi
Without free CI in GitHub, you might as well say:
"they can just shut the whole thing down and this reliability issue will be solved immediately"
I would not be surprised if a serious amount of this usage is not user-intended and instead the LLM just inserts some sort of CI job off the bat and people roll with it.
Github has a decade of positive reputation to deal out, I don't see Grok or OpenAI jumping in and competing with that.
After many outages we had to build our own free runner https://github.com/supercorp-ai/superci
The federated code forge (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50305573)
After everything announced in GitHub Universe and with that to improve the reliability of GitHub overall, yet we have another incident afterwards.
It doesn't matter what GitHub does, only you can decide for yourself to self-host rather than going all in on GitHub and it continues to go down.
Predicted this 6 years ago and self hosting has aged perfectly well. [1]
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50154406
[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22868406
Takes a few minutes a month to update and babysit. We only basically use the CI and the repository functionality though so gitlab has been "feature complete" for us for a while. Probably I we could swap to something like gitea or forgeo but the gitlab CI seems like a nice balance between powerful when it needs to be and simple otherwise for our use case so there is nothing driving us to swap.