← Back to context

Comment by Waterluvian

2 hours ago

To offer a data point (not a tribalist argument): GitHub Actions being down this often is still less expensive than the cost of switching everything somewhere else. Would rather have my team walk away from the PRs and do other tasks than have engineering effort, meetings, design pages, scheduling, etc. for switching over.

This is annoying and I'm here because it's down. But it would have to be far worse to come close to actually being worth changing.

A case study in vendor lock-in.

  • Pretty much, eh?

    If I could right now:

    1. go sign-up elsewhere 2. Log into GitHub and point Actions to that new host 3. All my actions files immediately worked without question

    I'd probably give it a spin and make a wiki page explaining how to swap back and forth. No meetings. No design issues. No scheduling. Just a flip switch on who to pay for computers.

  • For what it's worth, we switched some of our actions to a self-hosted Woodpecker instance, and although there were a few kinks to iron out, it works better overall (for example, because of better caching on that single instance, our docker images build faster).

We've started writing some new workflows against argo-workflows for the last like 9months or so. Especially for use cases where the actions are like self-service type automation.

I think people were so excited to move away from jenkins to something 'managed' just because of how much a dinosaur jenkins is and how much a pain in the ass it is to upgrade it... but now we are seeing how managed can bite you in the ass if the manager is incompetent.