42 comments

[ 4.2 ms ] story [ 63.6 ms ] thread
I went to look at a repo on Github today. Clicked on the "xxx commits" link to see the commit history, and got told I've hit a secondary rate limit and need to wait.

I'm the only person on this network that would even look at Github, and my connection has a dedicated IP, no CGN.

I regularly get 404s on legit links in slack that work for other people.
“GitLab - enterprise grade, meaning it’s bloated and confusing but it’ll impress your boss. This could be the choice if you need multiple meetings to make the choice.“

lol!

Made me chuckle. We use a self-hosted GitLab that I chose due to it having git and a container registry. The interface certainly can be confusing if you don't use the web UI often.
I have lost count of how many times something went down on GitHub ever since documenting it on this comment chain [0] and also predicting 6 years ago [1], that going all in and centralizing everything on to GitHub was really not a good idea if you need stability or to push a critical fix and your GitHub actions doesn't work.

Now, are you going to finally self host or should we continue to expect another outage on GitHub?

This time, there is no CEO of GitHub to help us. It is Copilot, and Tay.ai that are still struggling to maintain GitHub.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37395238

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22867803

It is so confusing to me. I never worked for company that wouldn't self host its code repository and CI/CD. All the way back to SVN and when Jenkins was stil called Hudson. Most of the time there was also a local proxy for all 3rd party dependencies/artifacts. I understand why open source projects love GitHub but why are software companies depending on it?
It sort of feels like no major open source repository can be possibly left well enough alone. I remember how SourceForge went down the drain, it's a real pity to see same happen with GH.

Side note: I read the URL as "dBus hell". We've all been there m8

Everyone wants to pin this on the Microsoft acquisition or incompetence but it seems pretty clear to me from the material GitHub has posted that AI has 10xed the amount of code being committed to GH, which has downstream effects everywhere - CI, Actions, code ingestion, everywhere. The author pins it on weird things like MS Copilot, which kind of feels like he’s listing off things he doesn’t like rather than casual favors. This is ignoring the 800 pound gorilla in the room.
I installed forgejo on my home server and never looked back. The only problem I face is when hosting an app on DigitalOcean App platform, or vercel etc. They only connect to GitHub.
Agree with Gitlab as an enterprise alternative. Beautifully boring and safe to have complex teams and permissions. Also has a good enough Terraform support, and a nice workflow to host docker images
(comment deleted)
So, what's the actual real alternative ? The one that also supports open source projects ? Ironically gitlab is costlier than github, and not without their faults, but that's "maybe" the only other alternative here, anything else ?
It's not that difficult to self-host the free version of gitlab.
Looking at the suggestions for self-hosting here and in other threads, I wonder why self-hosting Fossil is not more widely done. From the comments I’ve seen from its users, it seems to work quite well.
I'm not sure what to make of the graph.

On the one hand the acquisition of GitHub may have caused the availability to be worse.

On the other hand, the 100.00% availability before the acquisition looks suspicious, wondering if it's not just the status page being better updated.

(I'm aware of the recent availability problems with GitHub, but on the graph the problems start in 2020 and don't seem to worsen significantly)

I wasn't expecting to see the outages being nearly the same even before the 2023 ai inflection point
onedev onedev ondev

I still don't see this tool when it's about a forge. It is a fantastic tool. Seriously guys, you should really consider it !

For $5 a month I can host a server and put a bunch of projects on there. Yeah, I don't have a million stars on my repos but it works for what I need and I can give access to whoever I want.
Anyone would buckle right now. Microsoft just sucks more at it.
(comment deleted)
I would not be surprised if AI commits are the culprit. There is no way any service would cope with a constant stream of unfettered commits by sleepless always-on agents. Ironically, this same strategy seems to be what GH/MS (and other big companies) are evangelizing - and therefore dying by their own hand (in a way).
I think they went too far with AI internally. Complete collapse in quality of internal engineering practices.
Living in Eastern Europe has its perks. I hardly ever notice big GitHub outages because of time zone.

I'm also happy with how generous their free hosting and actions are.

People used GitHub's free infrastructure for over a decade without complaining. Now AI-generated spam and massive amounts of low-quality code are increasing costs everywhere, and suddenly GitHub is the bad guy for acting like a business. Criticizing centralization is fair, but pretending GitHub gave nothing to open source is just dishonest. Alternatives today, are probably going to be flooded by the low-quality AI generated code tomorrow...
I like the "written by human" banner at the bottom - that's a first for me and will be glad to see others adpot similar.

>Written by human All opinions are my own and not those of a large language model. Everything I write is one hundred percent human. Because I care!

It will be a long way before GitHub dies, but it is definitely sinking. Slop is killing it. I think Microslop, 'xcuse me, Microsoft, realises this too, but there is nothing they can do now that they committed to AI fully. I feel sad for the GitHub engineers, because they write pointless blog entries nobody believes anymore. Meanwhile existing services erode in quality. It's like in a submarine. You have one hole. You manage it. Well, more and more holes pop up the following days. We know where this is headed then ...
I often think about how I’d do it if I ran my own company.

I would really like to see what it would be like doing all code reviews over email. The repo would just be a simple vps-style server with git-only ssh access, there’d be a particular for-review/ branch namespace for code to be reviewed, and CI would just be a bot waiting for branches to show up and would mark refs as good or not by just annotating/tagging them. It could reply in the email thread with results too.

The mailing list would have a web archive viewer, naturally. That’s how you could look at old reviews. There’s tons of existing solutions for this, and it’s just html.

Chat would be on IRC with bots to archive the channels. Easy as hell.

The whole thing (except maybe the CI runners which need beefier hardware) could be done on a very cheap server.

GitHub is waaay over engineered for what you need to run a software project. Look at the Linux kernel, they just use a simple mailing list, and it’s debatably the most successful software project of all time.

Issue/bug tracking is scarier though. Because I’d probably want to yak shave my own solution and get too involved with that and not even focus on what the company does. Maybe it could be a bug tracking software company?