3 ms·

Why are you not using an alternative?

echelon 6y ago
> Why are you not using an alternative? I don't need two CI/CD pipelines. Nor do I have have time to build something like that. I need to spend my time working on the core product. The risk here is that my deploy SLA is tied to Github. I accepted this risk as the cadence of my deploys tends to be once to twice a day on average and Github is usually available (many nines). I made a choice, and now that choice is biting me. Now I'll evaluate if I should spend the time and effort to migrate off it. If this is the last of it and Microsoft makes a commitment to not break things, I'll likely stay as the effort to move is nonzero. If this begins to happen every month, on the other hand...
- jaekash 6y ago
  > I don't need two CI/CD pipelines. Maybe my question was unclear, but I was not asking why are no not using two services, I was asking why are you not using an alternative, and I meant instead of GitHub, not in addition to GitHub. > If this is the last of it and Microsoft makes a commitment to not break things, I'll likely stay as the effort to move is nonzero. Commitment without liability is not a commitment. It is just empty words. And I don't see Microsoft making any commitments with liability on their part for a free service.
  - echelon 6y ago
    > why are no not using two services Simplicity. Microsoft has a marketplace where they bundle a bunch of services together where developers already are. I didn't have to go elsewhere to look. It's a real competitive advantage they're building. That said, I may begin to look elsewhere. > And I don't see Microsoft making any commitments with liability on their part for a free service It's not a free service. I pay roughly $50/mo for the features I use. > And I don't see Microsoft making any commitments with liability on their part for a free service. I imagine they take their SLAs very seriously. Especially in light of this string of outages. If they don't, they're going to lose customers and good will.
    - jaekash 6y ago
      > I imagine they take their SLAs very seriously. What are the liabilities on them for failing to meet their SLA? Taking thing seriously is not a liability. Specifically in this case, what are their liability to you?

> Why are you not using an alternative? I don't need two CI/CD pipelines. Nor do I have have time to build something like that. I need to spend my time working on the core product. The risk here is that my deploy SLA is tied to Github. I accepted this risk as the cadence of my deploys tends to be once to twice a day on average and Github is usually available (many nines). I made a choice, and now that choice is biting me. Now I'll evaluate if I should spend the time and effort to migrate off it. If this is the last of it and Microsoft makes a commitment to not break things, I'll likely stay as the effort to move is nonzero. If this begins to happen every month, on the other hand...

jaekash 6y ago
> I don't need two CI/CD pipelines. Maybe my question was unclear, but I was not asking why are no not using two services, I was asking why are you not using an alternative, and I meant instead of GitHub, not in addition to GitHub. > If this is the last of it and Microsoft makes a commitment to not break things, I'll likely stay as the effort to move is nonzero. Commitment without liability is not a commitment. It is just empty words. And I don't see Microsoft making any commitments with liability on their part for a free service.
- echelon 6y ago
  > why are no not using two services Simplicity. Microsoft has a marketplace where they bundle a bunch of services together where developers already are. I didn't have to go elsewhere to look. It's a real competitive advantage they're building. That said, I may begin to look elsewhere. > And I don't see Microsoft making any commitments with liability on their part for a free service It's not a free service. I pay roughly $50/mo for the features I use. > And I don't see Microsoft making any commitments with liability on their part for a free service. I imagine they take their SLAs very seriously. Especially in light of this string of outages. If they don't, they're going to lose customers and good will.
  - jaekash 6y ago
    > I imagine they take their SLAs very seriously. What are the liabilities on them for failing to meet their SLA? Taking thing seriously is not a liability. Specifically in this case, what are their liability to you?