News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:GitHub was down by weberc2 on Monday July 31, 2017 @01:16PM (#14893918)
I'm of the impression that issues and PRs are all accessible via an API. What more should they do?
Re:GitHub was down by curun1r on Monday July 31, 2017 @05:07PM (#14895904)
> What more should they do?

How about storing issues and PRs in the actual git repository? They should index them for the UI, sure, but the source of truth should be a branch of the git repo just like it is with gh-pages. It should be possible to file a new issue by committing a markdown file to the correct branch and pushing it to Github. Their hub command line tool and their own client could facilitate adding all the correct metadata. This would allow people to work while Github.com is offline and synchronize everything once the service outage is over.

If you have access to a distributed database that is already the best available for manual conflict resolution, why wouldn't you want to use it to store this kind of data? A Github outage is like a partition when you think about it from a distributed db perspective, so treat it like an individual node died and still allow reads/writes to the rest of the cluster that can be merged back once the node comes back online.

Re:GitHub was down by hk__2 on Monday July 31, 2017 @05:50PM (#14896197)
> How about storing issues and PRs in the actual git repository?

Access to the git repository is regulated; issues and PRs aren’t. Anybody can fill an issue/PR on your repo, but only you (and your team) can modify the repo. You’d need to also store all the comments on all issues and PRs, even closed/rejected ones. In some repositories, that’d be huge.

Re:GitHub was down by theshrike79 on Tuesday August 01, 2017 @02:25AM (#14898336)
Of course the issue data in the repo should be considered read only.

And the amount of actual data needed to store issues is peanuts anyway.

Re:GitHub was down by hk__2 on Tuesday August 01, 2017 @05:39PM (#14905632)
> And the amount of actual data needed to store issues is peanuts anyway.

It’s not. Take something like github.com/Homebrew/homebrew-core. There are 15k closed PRs there. There have been 20 new ones today. It’s not rare to have 10-20 comments per PRs; some of them even go over 200. Add CI status, actual PR contents (git patches), comments reactions, edits, labels, milestones, assignees, reviews, projects.

IMHO having a tool to fetch issues locally is a good idea; storing them in the repo is not.

Re:GitHub was down by tedmiston on Monday July 31, 2017 @01:33PM (#14894153)
From the perspective of someone mid code review during the outage, it's worked as well as it could too. They preserve comment drafts client side that haven't posted to the server yet across page reloads. While it's a little frustrating to have to submit something 3-5x, they're definitely doing something for this use case already.

Also as others pointed out, just because the GitHub app is down doesn't always mean the GitHub git server itself is down.