[embedding-shape]

From GitHub CTO in 2025 when they announced they're moving everything to Azure instead of letting GitHub's infrastructure remain independent:

> For us, availability is job #1, and this migration ensures GitHub remains the fast, reliable platform developers depend on

That went about as well as everyone thought back then.

Does anyone else remember back in ~2014-2015 sometime, when half the community was screaming at GitHub to "please be faster at adding more features"? I wish we could get back to platforms (or OSes for that matter) focusing in reliability and stability. Seems those days are long gone.

[__alexs]

GitHub have not really got much better at adding new features either though :(

[phyzome]

I don't know, it's nice that they finally broke native browser in-page search. That's a great feature for people who hate finding things.

[omnimus]

I work on lots of smaller client projects - usually named by the hostname. I absolutely don't understand how at some point the github search got so great it became unable to find my own repo by its name.

We have since switched to self hosted Forgejo instance. Unsurprisingly the search works.

[cozzyd]

Makes you actually read the code!

[vulcan01]

Intended usage is to use Edge Copilot to search the page for you.

[BenjiWiebe]

Native browser in-page search is working for me, on Firefox. Is this a browser-specific change or is it a staged rollout coming my way soon?

[phyzome]

Firefox for me as well. It's dodgy on some pages, but on larger PRs it now breaks.

[fragmede]

Yeah for large files/PRs it's complicated because RAM is limited and bandwidth is limited so optimizing for them is tricky.

[embedding-shape]

This was before Actions and a whole lot of other non-git related stuff. There was years (maybe even a decade?) where GitHub essentially was unchanged besides fixes and small incremental improvements, long time ago :)

[wongarsu]

GH Actions was good for them as another billable feature, but I'm skeptical we actually gained much over external CI providers

The improvements to PR review have been nice though

[embedding-shape]

> The improvements to PR review have been nice though

I dunno, probably the worst UX downgrade so far, almost no PRs are "fully available" on page load, but requires additional clicks and scrolling to "unlock" all the context, kind of sucks.

Used to be you loaded the PR diff and you actually saw the full diff, except really large files. You could do CTRL+F and search for stuff, you didn't need to click to expand even small files. Reviewing medium/large PRs is just borderline obnoxious today on GH.

[epistasis]

I find it impossible to use the current diff view for most codebases, and spend tons of time clicking open all available sections...

They have somehow found the worst possible amount of context for doing review. I tend to pull everything down to VS Code if I want to have any confidence these days.

[cozzyd]

Don't forget the security implications if you host your own actions runner.

[nine_k]

What are these?

[jmaw]

Back in the day when software could be "finished". Ahh, the good 'ol days

[williamdclt]

They definitely have. Github evolved a lot faster after the microsoft acquisition, I remember being mildly impressed after it was stagnant for years (this is not an opinion on whether it was evolving in the right direction or if it was a good trade-off)

[__alexs]

No they were slow at doing features before, and they are still slow afterwards.

[carlmr]

They added the service unavailable feature.

[lobsterthief]

They’ve really improved Projects! If your team is entirely technical, this can replace Jira.

[braiamp]

> I wish we could get back to platforms (or OSes for that matter) focusing in reliability and stability

That's only a valid sentiment if you only use the big players. Both of those have medium/smaller competitors that have shown (for decades) that they are extremely boring, therefore stable.

[PxldLtd]

Try convincing the CTO that this panoply of smaller players will be around for 5yrs or worth the effort migrating to.

I'm at a much smaller outfit now so we have more freedom but I'd dread to think the arguments I would've had at the 4000+ employee companies I was at before.

[SlinkyOnStairs]

In that same period the big players have only gotten bigger and the "Mittelstand" in tech has been practically dying. Replaced by the flood of VC startups that are far too obsessed with "growth" to care about reliability and stability.

(Note that "is this company financially viable in the long term future" is an important part of stability. Doesn't matter how rock solid the software is if the startup's bankrupt by the end of next year.)

[lmm]

Like who? HN loves to rave about GitLab but they're even less stable than GitHub.

[braiamp]

Gitlab service may be unreliable, but Gitlab the product to deploy is extremely fine. Many third party instances of Gitlab that don't have problems that only happens at scale.

[awestroke]

Perhaps when they switch over fully to Azure they'll forget to disable IPv6 access. One can dream

[zahlman]

That's about when I joined, and all I really remember thinking was that it was cool that I could now share my repo publicly without having to try and run a server from a residential IP.

[comboy]

I think stability and reliability have vastly improved over the last years in general (not necessarily talking about gh specifically)

It's just that everybody is using 100 tools and dependencies which themselves depend on 50 others to be working.