Wow. If you look at all the issues this seems pretty common

https://github.com/google-gemini/gemini-cli/issues?q=is%3Ais...

Wow that's whole a lot of yapping

Having just had to buy 4TB of RAM, I appreciate this.

Github's been running on vibe code for a while now and it's starting to show

I suspect some companies may already be considering it. Especially with the wealth of alternatives today.

What is the quality-first, high uptime alternative to GitHub? My employer uses both GitHub and GitLab, and while I think GitLab is better, its quality also frankly sucks. It's riddled with bugs that have just been marinating on the issue tracker for years, and the most common "fix" for gnarly bugs in the CI platform is "revise the documentation to reflect the existing (broken) behavior".

Your favorite search engine or LLM will show you in a second, it's really easy.

The problem is that it's not enough. The fact that Github uses Git specifically is a technical detail; it could use mercurial equally easily, as Bitbucket used to. Github Actions, OWNERS files, PRs and review tools, issue tracker, wiki are all not Git features.

You might be surprised, but that's not true at all.

I once read someone commenting "Nobody writes code by hand without looking syntax up".

Man, you are just outing yourself as a complete beginner, the field is way deeper than you imagine and it's not even close.

That's a them problem.

i still find insightful ways to use git every day. amazing tool. it's a shame for those who only see it as "how to sync my repo with my coworkers"

> PRs and code review are not. CI/CD is not.

They can be. A PR can be made and code review conducted by submitting a patch to a mailing list. That's how the kernel and, I think, git itself is developed.

CI/CD is really a methodology. It just means integrating/deploying stuff as soon as its ready. So you just need maintainers to be able to run the test suite and deploy, which seems like a really basic thing.

Check out Gitea. Its kind of a clone of github but you can self host.

It's not as bad as you think, I run the helm upgrade when patches come out, the backing store is S3 or managed SQL, it runs a nightly k8s cron called gitlab-backup which tarballs the whole thing into an s3 bucket with a single command restore should disaster strike. (This is part of the product, not a thing I wrote.)

I probably only babysit it for 30 minutes per year, including all the upgrades.

It depends how high you value your headaches, and how high, your org's downtime. Github not working accrues over the hourly rate of every developer affected, which is likely $70-$100 a hour. 10 hours of outage in a year affecting a team of 10 would cost north of $70k, enough to hire a part-time SRE dedicated just to tend to your Gitlab installation.

^ this. the last thing i want is to add to my workload. take my money and make my life easier, even if it means that for one hour every couple months i can't do anything

So that's what the Tay, and Zoe AI bots were doing all this time after they were cancelled and banned off of Twitter.

Working on the GitHub Azure migration and for years it's gone so well so far.

> seeing no azure incidents on the status page

… in all seriousness, that is hardly proof that Azure isn't having an outage.

I second this. Not experiencing any Azure issues at this time.

This is far too simple. The correct way is to generate an NFT that's a screenshot from Google Maps of where you'd like to hit, and a blockchain-watching AI will spot it, figure out where you probably mean and send the coordinates to the fire control system.