[HN Gopher] GitHub is investigating an incident with Pull Reques...
___________________________________________________________________
GitHub is investigating an incident with Pull Requests, Issues and
Webhooks
Author : pil0u
Score : 64 points
Date : 2023-11-27 20:00 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.githubstatus.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.githubstatus.com)
| jmuguy wrote:
| Yep, we're in the midst of doing code review here and can't get
| our commits to show up on the site.
| jacoblambda wrote:
| fwiw pull requests heads can be accessed locally via
|
| ```
|
| ${remote}/pull/${ID}/head
|
| ```
|
| where remote is the git remote for the repo (probably `origin`)
| and id is the pull request number. You may need to fetch to get
| the up to date head and if it still doesn't work, try just
| fetching the ref directly from the remote.
|
| You can then diff against main/master, try merging into main,
| etc. which should give you everything you need to code review.
|
| If you want to diff the current branch against main/master at
| the branch point, you can do:
|
| ```
|
| git diff $(git merge-base --fork-point master)
|
| ```
|
| That will diff against the point in history where the branch
| diverged.
| technics256 wrote:
| I came here to check why my merge status wasn't updating and yep,
| HN breaks news the fastest still.
|
| With all of the GithHub Universe AI announcements, it's sad to
| see the main github product being ignored.
| adnjoo wrote:
| :(
| jameswatling wrote:
| It took them a while to flag also. My team ran into issues at
| least 80 minutes before this was posted
| JLCarveth wrote:
| GitHub outages seem to have happened a lot this year.
| baq wrote:
| Also, last year.
|
| And the year before. My previous job even floated the idea to
| come back to onprem infra for this reason.
| FridgeSeal wrote:
| I've also noticed a _lot_ of consistency issues on their site
| recently.
|
| Open PR; someone comments-doesn't show up no matter how many
| hard refreshes, browser restarts, etc. Push a commit to your
| branch - doesn't show up in the PR, but shows up in the commit
| history. If you have auto-merge ticked, it might never merge
| even when it meets the conditions, and if the branch merges you
| won't know, because again, the PR never updates and it still
| looks open.
|
| I have these issues- in varying degrees of duration and
| severity- about once a week.
| calvinmorrison wrote:
| Web hooks are not reliable. When engineering your system, you
| need to implement a scheduled based watcher to go back and clean
| up hook issues.
| bob1029 wrote:
| I gave up trying to be a polite API consumer with GitHub
| events, etc. Polling the basic resources every minute is way
| more reliable and your code will survive a junior developer's
| shenanigans.
|
| I had the REST API e-tag polling working well, but then I
| discovered my org event stream didn't include label changes.
| This is a separate thing I needed to poll and at that point I
| lost my mind. I refuse to keep track of 6+ pieces of state in
| order to pull essential data from an API.
|
| My current pattern is to list all open issues and then compare
| their updated_at with persisted copies. If any changes, then I
| refresh the comments for the issue as well as top-level items
| (title/body/labels).
| brazzledazzle wrote:
| Yeah GitHub doesn't like when you do frequent polling over
| hooks but you pretty much need to have something polling
| (infrequently) to catch undelivered hooks.
| noman-land wrote:
| Maybe I wasn't paying attention as much but I never remember
| Github having this high a frequency of outages before Microsoft
| bought them.
| selykg wrote:
| Before Microsoft bought them they were basically at a
| standstill and no new features were being added to the product.
| At least, that's my recollection of it, perhaps someone can
| correct me if I'm wrong.
| hotnfresh wrote:
| The big one-step-forward-five-steps-back UI redesign was
| before the acquisition, wasn't it?
| ljm wrote:
| Only now is GH redesigning the UI to be fluid-width
| everywhere.
|
| And GitHub actions were basically sharing the infra of Azure
| Pipelines.
| aicez wrote:
| Agreed. I vaguely recall that there were no new features for
| more than a year.
| midasuni wrote:
| My screwdriver doesn't seem to need more features. It's nice
| stable and reliable.
| jkrubin wrote:
| Please create a PAT to enable your screwdriver.
| johnfn wrote:
| Before the MS acquisition, Github didn't even have emoji
| reactions on comments in issue threads, so people just
| spammed +1s if they had the same issue. It was terrible.
| (You can still see evidence of this on older repos.) They
| also didn't have like 5 billion other features that we now
| take for granted.
|
| EDIT: Sorry, this is incorrect. GH did ship them prior to
| the MS acquisition. I do however remember them taking an
| EXTREMELY long time to ship emoji reactions, which struck
| me as a fairly trivial feature. I stand by the point that
| GH ships features faster post-acquisition, though.
| Springtime wrote:
| They had reactions two years prior as confirmed by their
| blog post[1] about it.
|
| [1] https://github.blog/2016-03-10-add-reactions-to-pull-
| request...
| johnfn wrote:
| Dang, you're right. Sorry about that.
|
| I remembered that reactions irked me for some reason, but
| I had incorrectly tied it to the MS acquisition. The real
| issue was this: it took Github an _extremely_ long amount
| of time to add a feature as simple as reactions. Github
| was founded in '08, and didn't add reactions for another
| _eight years_! But I distinctly remember once MS acquired
| them, they started shipping features left and right, and
| features much larger than simple emoji reactions.
| ad404b8a372f2b9 wrote:
| That's not true. Reactions on comments were implemented
| long before the acquisition. And people still did +1.
|
| On the other hand, what they didn't have was search
| locked behind a login screen.
| stabbles wrote:
| Before this gets downvoted, are there any notable
| features that could only have been added thanks to the
| Microsoft acquisition?
|
| I think GitHub actions are pretty successful, which may
| not have been developed by Microsoft as it was launched
| right after acquisition, but I guess it's easier to keep
| free since it runs on their own hardware.
|
| I don't immediately see copilot as a GitHub feature, but
| maybe that'll change for better or worse.
| johnfn wrote:
| I think you're asking a slightly incorrect question. Very
| few features could "only" be added thanks to the MS
| acquisition. What you really want to know is how many
| _more_ features were added, thanks to MS. Or, how much
| longer would those features have taken to be built if
| GitHub was not acquired by MS. My gut feeling, seeing GH
| pre- and post-acquisition, says that a lot of the stuff
| they shipped post-MS would simply never have been shipped
| before.
|
| Under MS, they shipped - just off the top of my head:
|
| * dev containers
|
| * vscode-github-in-the-browser
|
| * github actions
|
| * that extremely useful fuzzy-find that repos have (press
| t in any repo)
|
| * copilot
|
| I seriously doubt they could have shipped a single one of
| those things pre-MS.
| thedaly wrote:
| > * that extremely useful fuzzy-find that repos have
| (press t in any repo)
|
| I didn't know this. Thanks for the tip!
| mook wrote:
| GitHub Actions seems to use Azure a lot under the hood;
| given that they seemed to use AWS for older features
| (attachments, releases, etc.) it seems likely that it
| actually needed Microsoft.
|
| My best guess, with no knowledge of what actually
| happened, is that it was derived from Azure Pipelines.
| travoc wrote:
| Modern impact drivers are pretty amazing if you have more
| than one screw to operate.
| sen wrote:
| Yeah I don't remember the last time I used a screw
| driver. Electric screw driver for tiny stuff (one of my
| fav tools of the last decade+) and a small impact driver
| for bigger screws.
| tester756 wrote:
| Microsoft brought to them shitton of new users like big
| enterprises
|
| which implies a lot of more challenges
| bitvoid wrote:
| I'm sure making private repos free also dramatically
| increased the number of total repos to manage. I know
| personally that I went from having a couple of public repos
| to at least a dozen private repos for notes, configs, etc.
| charlesfries wrote:
| It'd be great if the apparent "world's leading AI-powered
| developer platform" didn't go down every week.
| kemiller2002 wrote:
| They are being honest about their position. They do call it
| "artificial intelligence powered"
| gumballindie wrote:
| They should understand this. If users move away who's code will
| the rinse and resell?
| gtirloni wrote:
| Move where exactly? Bitbucket and GitLab aren't that great
| either.
|
| I'm affected by GitHub outages maybe once every 2 months for
| a couple of hours. Sure, various parts go down but it's never
| something super impactful to my workflow.
|
| It's not great but, IMHO, not outrage worthy.
| gonzo41 wrote:
| That tag line isn't for you. It's for aging C-suite exec's who
| like fancy sounding words.
|
| As for not going down. Meh, at least you don't have to do on-
| call for it. That's kind of half the point of paying for SaaS.
| At the end of the day, it's just a human system.
| rymiel wrote:
| Every week? You're being very generous to them
| contingencies wrote:
| Outages, forced 2FA bullshit, half-wit AI feature because
| buzzword... all this makes long term customers want to self host.
| Can someone drop a hint to the CEO please: WE PAY YOU TO BE
| BORING AND STABLE.
| zlg_codes wrote:
| Kinda sad that my self-hosted Raspberry Pi on consumer Internet,
| running cgit, stays up longer than GitHub.
|
| The Microsoft acquisition has not been good for them.
| unicornmama wrote:
| Frustrating and unproductive day for those trapped in CI driven
| development mode. Mild annoyance for the rest of us.
| gherkinnn wrote:
| I have never worked, or know someone who has, at a place that
| doesn't rely on CI (does that make it CIDD?).
|
| Of all the *DDs, this is one of the few that is done without
| much complaint or major problems or controversies around it.
| hn_ta456 wrote:
| CI does make sense if your job entails endlessly churning web
| app features and UI.
| gherkinnn wrote:
| That it be and applies to me. And countless others. Oh the
| drudge.
|
| I also know countless people who work outside of CRUD world
| who rely on CI. The only exception I can think of are
| scientists who, well, tend not to use version control
| beyond folder naming. Not that I blame them, on the
| contrary.
| adnjoo wrote:
| are github runners stalling?
| whalesalad wrote:
| Anyone else having issues w/ AWS connectivity too?
| adhamsalama wrote:
| Hopefully AI can fix this.
| eek2121 wrote:
| Oh, it must be a day that ends in "y".
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-11-27 23:02 UTC)