Oh wow, I'm in the position to be able to give a peek behind the curtain of something (validly!!) critiqued as AI slop! Exciting.

I originally made the core data functionality of this site for myself because I was curious what the uptime stats for each service were (I build something that heavily depends on GitHub), and to viz the distribution/severity of those incidents, again per-service, over time.

It involved a lot of back-and-forth, and is not a one-shotter; maybe closer to 40-50 shots over maybe ~10 hours of human time. A couple memorable things that made it complicated, irrespective of the UI: sneaky bugs around double-counting time for overlapping incidents, no GitHub API for incidents so you need to puppeteer-scrape the backlog of incidents to get historical data. Although, you all are right to call out that the CSS was three shots, though, and it shows :) I thought it looked so cool in ~January 2026 and now it gives me the ick, too!

For people who are curious about how much direction went into the information architecture/presentation, it was fairly substantial. I wanted a contribution graph style viz and it took many turns to get it working the way I wanted. The swimlane viz for selected-day-incident visualization was also me, because I love swimlane graphs.

I ended up sharing it with some folks and they wanted to reference it, so I put it on a website. So it's jokey for sure, but I take my jokes seriously! I'm grateful that people have feedback on how it can better functionally and visually :)

Compared to near unusable pages that large organizations produce, yes this page is highly effective at conveying information. Who cares how it was produced?

The Bootstrap of 2020s.

What really grinds my gears is how easy it is to get better designs out of LLMs. But if you don't ask, you get the default.

Can you elaborate on how your Forgejo frontend will be different than the default one? I'm asking because I've only ever used GitHub, GitLab and Forgejo for longer periods and Forgejo was the fastest and easiest to use for me.

Sure, but it isn't completely wrong either.

GH going down used to be quite rare. If it failed to load I'd spend a bunch of time trying to figure out what was wrong with my internet connection, just to read on HN that it was down for everyone.

This week GH failed to load and I automatically assumed it was a GH issue - just for it to be followed up a few minutes later by a marketing coworker complaining about internet connectivity. Turns out the office internet connection was dropping about 50% of all packets.

It is bad enough that business-side managers are noticing that GH issues are slowing work down. That would've been unimaginable a few years ago.

Apparently, you aren't alone. :)

https://github.com/DaMrNelson/github-historical-uptime/issue...

My guess would be a obnoxious and lethal mixture of all of the above.

Yea but thats not really an excuse, is it? They offer a service, (some) people pay for that service and should therefore expect it to work. If GitHub cannot keep up with the growth then they could disable new account registrations or start reducing free tiers so people either use the free tier more mindfully or need to pay for usage-base products like Actions which would GitHub allow to scale.

Not a valid excuse without knowing what their historical growth rate has been. And how much of the instability is load related.

They are highly responsible for all of that. They are diversified a lot with a lot of random things instead of focusing on their core business. They have actively pushed people to use the service and feature more.

Think about countless actions that have to run almost at every push and PR push! Also, remember that we were used to use external services for "actions", and they basically killed the competition by offering their own CI actions at no cost to most users.

Also, they did a lot of reworks in the last years, not necessarily for the best like the PR diff page, and probably not in the most efficient way.

I guess that also means this year GitHub has not yet made it a single week without an outage of some kind.

Java or Bedrock edition, and have you tried logging into your EntraID Microsoft Teams for Xbox account lately? Make sure to check the box to keep you logged in!

Not as bad as it is now. All I see are suggested posts from people I never connected with and those are full of instagramesque self-promoting banal vibes.

TBH, even LinkedIn seemed to provide me with posts advertising events that happened two weeks ago a bit less pre-acquisition.

I wouldn't know, somehow this game I bought maybe 15 years ago is no longer playable for me, my account was supposed to be migrated from Mojang to Microsoft or similar, but then that never happened or something, and trying to login now asks me to contact Microsoft support, which I've tried 3-4 times, never had anyone respond to me so who knows how the game is today? I stopped trying at this point...

Personally, once a game I own is janked from my hands because of organizational decisions, that's the time I'll stop consider the game "in good shape", but I'm sure the people who had to buy the same game a second time still enjoy it.

They deleted my account from 2010 because I didn't convert it to a Microsoft one. They baked an incredibly aggressive chat filter into multiplayer, even if you're not playing on official servers. They've added microtransactions for things that we previously free (skins, resource packs). They force you into their shitty, bloated, user-hostile launcher with adverts.

It's been nonstop content-slop since the acquisition. New mobs, new blocks, new items, new blocks, new items, new mobs, new mobs, new biomes. Some of them are good but the totality of adding a bunch of stuff has been to destroy the simplicity that was one of the draws of the original game. Now it's an exploration and niche-mechanics-exploitation game more than a virtual legos game. You don't go mining any more, you find trading loops with villagers.

This was happening to some degree pre-acquisition, but since the acquisition it's been this non-stop.

Some of it's good. The Nether and the oceans were really boring before their respective updates.

They should have called Minecraft "done" around the acquisition time and started on Minecraft 2.

Has nothing to do with Microsoft acquisition... AI usage has increased demand and load. More PRs, more Action runners, more of everything firing. GitHub just wasn't ready for the scale and are now having issues catching up with it as it continues to increase exponentially.

> It has been working quite well until recently.

I'm not sure how reliable the data is, but average uptime seems to have dipped measurably starting within a year of the aquisition, according to https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/

It also used to be run as an independent company with access to MS's resources.

Now it's a unit in their AI hype machine.

MSFT was pretty arms length for the first 5-6 years. I was honestly kind of impressed and it made my opinion of MSFT better. But then AI made it too attractive of a target and MSFT couldn't help but make it a place the former CEO wanted to leave (and it has been running headless for about a year now).

It's quite disappointing objectively, but I expected worse from MSFT.

That Blender Gitea theme is really nice! I wonder why exactly it's so much easier on the eyes? In a lot of ways all of these are "just Github" with minor changes, so the one that is actually better really stands out.

GitHub used to be like that before they rebuilt everything in React.

One does not mention TFS in polite company

Only alternative outside of GitHub and GitLab I've used was Bitbucket, and it was worse - but this was time when GitHub was good.

Don't forget CodePlex!

Gitlab CI has some tech debt from accumulating geological layers of different ways to do things, but overall it's pretty good, it scales to more complicated setups, and it's not too painful.

Now the best way to use GHA is to do the bare minimum. Put all your CI logic in a script that you can test locally, and just have GHA run your script. Even that is painful. And, somehow, impossible to make secure without having spent 5,000 hours reading all the previous ways people got pwn'd by Github Action's horrendous security model.

My main problem with Gitlab is that after years I still can't find what I'm looking for in the UI. It's always exactly in the third place I look. Otherwise Gitlab has been good. Even self-hosted works pretty well.

Everything about their UI/UX screams of doing the bare minimum to check off a box on a feature list. It reminds me of Jira.

Gitlab is pretty decent. Honestly I would say there's not much between GitHub and Gitlab. Gitlab's CI is more powerful than GitHub's IMO, but the UX is a bit worse. But it's really marginal.

They're both slow and have tons of long-standing missing features. But they're ok. I'd definitely rather use Gitea/Gogs/Forgejo, and maybe Tangled if it supported normal setups (e.g. private repos).

This is smart but also hilarious.

Sure, I guess skywriting prayers to the spaghetti monster is also an option, but neither of those will do anything.