> I mean GitHub in general has been pretty reliable minus the two outages they had last year
Huh? GitHub has had major outages practically every other week for a few years now. There are pages of HN threads[1].
There's a reason why githubstatus.com doesn't show historical metrics and uptime percentages: it would make them look incompetent. Many outages aren't even officially reported there.
I do agree that when it's up, performance is typically better than Gitlab's. But describing GH as reliable is delusional.
> Was it specific services within GitHub that failed a lot?
Well, everything from its frontends, to the CI service, to the Git service itself. People weren't able to push, pull, deploy or review code for hours at a time. Just major disruptions all around, which happened regularly.
I do think this has improved slightly over the past few months, but you were lucky if you weren't affected much.
You can't throw around specific metrics ("two outages they had last year") then claim you were just sharing a personal anecdote when someone calls you out and brings receipts. Just take the L.
I absolutely can because this is a discussion. Being called delusional for sharing my experience on a platform I use _at least_ 40 hours a week was a bit much but in case you missed it, I relented. They brought receipts and I came down from my position because there was none. I wasn't arguing with anyone or saying anyone was wrong about anything.
Do you expect all of your conversations to be backed by facts and citation? Is that why the only comments you make are aggressive and confrontational? Because it's easier than the bar you're setting for everyone else? Yea, I looked back at your history, not a single url.
And now I'm taking a position.
> No worries you’re fine. I guess downtime was much more widespread than I could even imagine.
Huh? GitHub has had major outages practically every other week for a few years now. There are pages of HN threads[1].
There's a reason why githubstatus.com doesn't show historical metrics and uptime percentages: it would make them look incompetent. Many outages aren't even officially reported there.
I do agree that when it's up, performance is typically better than Gitlab's. But describing GH as reliable is delusional.
[1]: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...