GitHub pull requests were down
145 comments
·August 5, 2025keb_
ajsnigrutin
Still doesn't read email, but it's close to that.
o_m
GitHub isn't focusing on creating a good Git platform anymore, they are an AI company now
dzader
[dead]
dewey
GitHub in essence is still pretty much the same, there's products that have feature creep but I wouldn't say GitHub does that.
I can't say that I'm having issues with the performance either. I work with large PRs too (Especially if there's vendored dependencies) but I never ran into a show stopping performance issue that would make it "useless".
inetknght
> there's products that have feature creep but I wouldn't say GitHub does that.
I remember GitHub from years ago. I still find myself looking for things that were there years ago but have since moved.
Also, GitHub search is (still) comically useless. I just clone and use grep instead.
davidspiess
I noticed this recently too when using Firefox.
rileymichael
did all of the devs leave?
https://www.businessinsider.com/github-ceo-developers-embrac...
ryandrake
> Instead of selling products based on helpful features and letting users decide, executives often deploy scare tactics that essentially warn people they will become obsolete if they don't get on the AI bandwagon. For instance, Julia Liuson, another executive at Microsoft, which owns GitHub, recently warned employees that "using AI is no longer optional."
So many clowns. It's like everyone's reading from the same script/playbook. Nothing says "this tool is useful" quite like forcing people to use it.
MrGilbert
> It's like everyone's reading from the same script/playbook.
I'd assume that many CEO are driven by the same urge to please the board. And depending on your board, there might be people on it who spend many hours per week on LinkedIn, and see all the success stories around AI, maybe experienced something first hand.
Good news: It's, from my estimate, only a phase. Like when blockchain hit, and everyone wanted to be involved. This time - and that worries me - the ressources involved are more expensive, though. There might be a stronger incentive for people to "get their money back". I haven't thought about the implications yet.
depr
People say this a lot, please the board. But why would so many boards be hype-driven and CEO's be rational? It might just as well be the C-suite themselves who are the source of it.
Eisenstein
It's not like blockchain. Blockchain legitimately made things slower and less useful for dubious benefits.
AI is more like the early web. There is definite value that people can see, but no one really knows how to monetize beyond the incredibly obvious 'sell people access to it', so everyone is throwing spaghetti at the wall waiting for it to stick. When someone gets it to stick, there will be a giant amount of money coming at them, but until then there will be a ton of people with sauce all over their faces looking like idiots.
bogzz
It definitely feels like the imbecility of the corporate class has reached new levels.
conradfr
AI is not for developers only!
charcircuit
People are biased to using tools they are familiar with. The idea that if a tool was useful people would use it simply false. In order to avoid being disrupted, extra effort needs to be made to get people to learn new tools.
badosu
Reminder that Github _still_ does not support IPv6: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/10539
sethops1
I contacted GitHub support about this and they assured me they understand it's a priority and are working on it. Three years ago.
maerF0x0
cheaper than layoffs.
kunley
[flagged]
xyse53
Devs leaving can often be a stability boost :)
stevefolta
But if that's what they want, they may be driving out the exact wrong subset of their devs.
doubled112
Right up until it isn't.
arccy
I guess they let copilot review their code
shakna
Well, the CEO did say to embrace AI or get out of code, 2 days ago... And MS previously said AI is not-optional for their devs...
hiccuphippo
Maybe they are trying vibeops now.
jennyholzer
At Microsoft vibeops is an age old tradition.
bdcravens
HN sure has changed. A few years ago there would be at least a dozen comments about installing Gitlab, including one major subthread started by someone from Gitlab.
lrvick
We recommend Codeberg/Forgejo now since it is better in every way, and Gitlab went corpo.
NewJazz
Gitlab was always for profit.
And forgejo doesn't have feature parity at all with gitlab. Neither does github, for that matter.
Just take a look at how to push container images from a cicd pipeline in gitlab vs. Forgejo.
fmbb
What’s the difference?
Pushing images is a oneliner.
Elucalidavah
Are those any better than self-hosted gitlab, or do you only mean central-hosted usage?
NewJazz
Codeberg is central hosted so I think they mean in general.
factorialboy
Not just HN, Gitlab has perhaps changed as well.
john01dav
I use gitea on a server in my basement because I don't trust these hosted solutions to not use my code for LLM training or who knows what else.
zaphar
Me too. I have it mirroring stuff from github too for occasions just like this.
lrvick
Does not impact me, because my team and I self-host Forgejo for all our work.
People seem to forget Git was meant to be decentralized.
redrove
Yes, but you may work with other people, other organizations, or at least depend on open source code that's hosted on GitHub.
I agree with the sentiment though.
lrvick
Do work in and rely on self hosted forks so you are not blocked, and upstream when upstream code submissions become possible again.
pelagicAustral
Good thing I always commit directly to the main branch.
mattwad
this is broken too!
mmastrac
Good thing we're using a shared Samba drive and editing files directly without locks!
SparkyMcUnicorn
Project_v2_final3 is looking good, but remember to grab the new actionscript files out of Project_v2_final4 as well.
tetha
We have post-its with file names on a wall in the office. You take one down if you edit the file, and put it back up when you're done. Easy.
Though I wish I was entirely kidding. ~12 years ago or so we did that if one of two parallel development teams had to modify a message of the network protocol to avoid incompatibilities and merge problems.
Mind you, these were SVN merges. I can't even verbalize my feelings about SVN merges but by a mixture of laughing and groaning in pain, like if you stubbed your toe in a painful, but entirely funny way.
taude
So glad we never bothered to migrate from Visual Source Safe
davey48016
That's a single point of failure. If you email code changes around and use an email client that copies everything offline, then the history of your code base is distributed across all of your developers' laptops.
vehemenz
Make sure everyone has caching disabled, for maximum effect
ZiiS
Still better than CVS then /s
jaredsohn
Good thing we just SSH into production and make the changes live.
rwmj
You're using Ansible?
redserk
Subtle Elixir/Erlang advocacy here.
gloxkiqcza
Vibe coding nonetheless #gofastandbreakthings
phendrenad2
rsync is all you need ;)
escapecharacter
They must mean their local main branch.
RonanSoleste
No the remote one. No need for a local branch.
eats_indigo
Given Github's critical role in software engineering delivery, their SLA commitments are really quite poor, perhaps unacceptable.
harrison_clarke
luckily, git itself works pretty well when there's an outage
sucks for people that use issues/PRs for coordination and had a planning meeting scheduled, though
graemep
It is critical for those who choose to use it.
If you deliberately decide to use a system that introduces a single point of failure into a decentralised system, you have to live with the consequences.
From their point of view, unless they start losing paying users over this, they have no incentive to improve. I assume customers are happy with the SLA, otherwise why use Github?
yunwal
Network effects are quite strong
clysm
Why is this linking to a merged PR, or a PR at all, and not a status page?
organsnyder
It must be back up!
njovin
Props to Github for having an accurate status page. AWS and Google should take note.
ietktnz
Status page says "Incident with Pull Requests". Pull requests status is listed as "Normal". Status text says issue with degraded performance for Webhooks and Issues, does not mention Pull Requests.
I would give that a 5/10 accuracy at best!
ericyan
The status page has been updated. PR and webhook statused red and now listed as "Incident".
(Disclosure: GitHub employee)
samgranieri
they've updated the page since then. Take a look
hnthrow90348765
I miss the days where downtime would be like half a day or more and you could use it as an excuse to go home or do something else.
Weirdly people were less angry about it back then than we seem to be today.
I've got this feeling that the endless feature creep of Github has begun to cause rot of core essential features. Up until only recently, the PR review tab performed so poorly it was practically useless for large PRs.