3 ms·
It's easy from an armchair to say things like they should just get more capacity, or they should segregate free repos onto other servers. But maybe they are doi
by frollogaston 2mo ago
It's easy from an armchair to say things like they should just get more capacity, or they should segregate free repos onto other servers. But maybe they are doing what you're thinking, and with that churn they get mistakes that cause outages, esp dealing with legacy systems. I've been there (not at GitHub or MSFT).
- sqren 2mo agoThey do not need to make any technical changes. They could make the change overnight: $1 per repo per month (or whatever). This would stop the aggressive growth that they clearly cannot handle anyway. The question is: are they willing to compromise growth for QoS. So far the answer is a resounding: "no". They are deliberately sacrificing the experience of existing users to gain new ones.
- frollogaston 2mo agoThere are tons of existing free users, they'd be sacrificing those too. And yeah they don't want to sacrifice growth either, so the remaining is an engineering question.
- ksbd-pls-finish 2mo agoNo way I pay $1/repo/month. No way I pay $1/repo/year. I still host and maintain my old code on GitHub, but any free tier pricing update and I jump ship immediately.
- matkoniecz 2mo agoI would migrate my 246 repositories before paying even a cent.