GitHub Actions down again today

(githubstatus.com)

173 points | by cebert 1 hour ago

28 comments

  • a10c 33 minutes ago
    My action failed with "Unexpected error fetching GitHub release for tag refs/heads/master: HttpError: Sorry. Your account was suspended"

    Which certainly made me shit myself, briefly.

    • grim_io 26 minutes ago
      A brownout redefined.
    • drcongo 18 minutes ago
      Same. It's weird how I always find out that GitHub is down before GitHub does. Took 15 minutes before it appeared on githubstatus.com
      • simonjgreen 15 minutes ago
        More likely that 'update the Status site' lives a long way down their incident response plan, and they have alarms going off well before that
      • jaapz 16 minutes ago
        All these monitoring rules are of the format "when 500 errors > baseline for x minutes". Otherwise you'd have monitoring alerts every second. So it is normal for users to already see errors before github officially counts it as an outage.
        • echelon 3 minutes ago
          In a high performance service with good maintenance and upkeep, you page for all 500s. A noisy pager forces the team to fix the 500s.

          Maybe the Github Actions infrastructure isn't run like that.

      • re-thc 4 minutes ago
        > It's weird how I always find out that GitHub is down before GitHub does

        No, it's not. Official updates = potential SLA penalties. Always requires approval.

  • BrunoBernardino 0 minutes ago
    If you don't want to self-host Gitea/Forgejo, I recommend SourceHut for private repos and Codeberg for public ones. Happy to answer any questions you might have for either based on my experience!
  • cpfohl 36 minutes ago
    Wasn’t my fault this time! I haven’t started work yet.

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47237377

    • folkrav 13 minutes ago
      Hah, I know the feeling. I installed Ubuntu on a PC recently, it obviously happened to be one of the days they got DDOSed and apt repos were unreachable. I had other things to take care of, so I put it aside for the next week or so. It didn't help very much, cause after picking it back up, halfway through, Snapcraft went down.
    • thesdev 5 minutes ago
      Next thing you're gonna tell us you're SRE at GitHub.
    • Waterluvian 35 minutes ago
      Yeah but you thought about it, didn’t you?
    • Andrex 19 minutes ago
      Uh oh. That means there's at least one more like you out there that we don't know about.
    • ramon156 23 minutes ago
      Was about to send my bill to you.

      ... You're off the hook this time./s

  • pistoriusp 25 minutes ago
    Whilst you're waiting for it to come back, try out AGENT-CI, which runs GitHub Actions on your machine: https://agent-ci.dev. (Open source, etc.)

    No, it's not like "act," because it uses the standard Github runner, the difference is that the control plane is an emulation of api.github.com, because of this we can do all kinds of nice things:

    Caching in ~0 ms. Pause on failure, so you can let your AI agent fix it and retry without pushing.

    • a1o 13 minutes ago
      What I don’t get about this is how you run OS specific tasks (Windows, macOS, Linux)..

      I started playing with proxmox VMs and containers in them (docker and tart) to see if I can build some local infrastructure to properly solve this…

    • ramon156 21 minutes ago
      "Its not like act, because we can add AI"

      Is what it boils down to.

      > codex "Fix this pipeline, use `act` to verify your changes"

      • Xirdus 9 minutes ago
        I had extremely bad experience trying to setup act on my Macbook. If this is something that actually works (and doesn't steal my credentials), I'm willing to try it despite AI non-features.
  • bouk 35 minutes ago
    Insane, we have to come up with contingency plans now for long-duration GitHub outages because we can't safely do deployments. For a service we're paying thousands of $ per year for even though we host runners ourselves...
    • the8472 2 minutes ago
      [delayed]
    • decodebytes 30 minutes ago
      Same thoughts - we use an action to ship to production, its builds an image, pushes it to ECS which triggers a deployment.

      We can't be blocked here. Seems silly what we settled on this, but for a long time GitHub had been reliable enough for many years, but things are sliding down the pan as of late.

      • mystifyingpoi 3 minutes ago
        Sounds like a very easy process to rewrite in bash/python and have it on hand if needed.
    • dnnddidiej 26 minutes ago
      It is a control pain
    • sebmellen 34 minutes ago
      Same here. You’d think they could at least separate out the GitHub-hosted and self-hosted runners, so you’re still able to dispatch jobs if the self-hosted runners are down.
      • ketzu 28 minutes ago
        If the job queue is down, that wouldn't help, would it?

        On my repo the jobs do not get scheduled on the PRs at all, so I assume that separation wouldn't help for todays issue.

    • sofixa 30 minutes ago
      Depending on how many thousands of $ per year, it would probably be cheaper and more reliable to self-host GitLab. It's better in terms of organisational structure (you can have one, including access and secret inheritance), and (personal view) Gitlab-CI is better than GitHub Actions because it doesn't push you towards a JavaScript/NPM style dependency hell. And it's actually fairly easy to self-hosted, with options from a single machine with an omnibus package that handles everything to a full blown autoscaling Kubernetes deployment.
      • hsbauauvhabzb 10 minutes ago
        Sounds good until you see their cvedetails page
        • sofixa 7 minutes ago
          I mean, the GitHub Actions supply chain risks and attacks definitely compensate for any GitLab security vulnerabilities you can think of.
    • re-thc 3 minutes ago
      > For a service we're paying thousands of $ per year for even though we host runners ourselves...

      Wait until you charge you for self-hosting runners.

      Oh wait. They already tried.

  • efromvt 29 minutes ago
    Incredible how reliable the heuristic of "something seems off - probably github being down" has gotten these days
    • comboy 22 minutes ago
      It's big enough that every time it goes down, it surely stops somebody from pushing fix for what they currently have broken, so I wonder if status page services see some kind of ripple from github outages.
  • altern8 34 minutes ago
    Why do they go down so often? Is it true that the reason is that they've incorporated too much AI without human review?
    • cautiouscat 27 minutes ago
      Microsoft has boasted 30% of their code written by AI.[1] However we could only guess if AI generated code is the issue or something else, or a combination of things.

      That being said there was a noticeable trend starting around 2022.[2] That being said they’ve also been doing a big migration to Azure. It’s likely a combination of things.

      1: https://www.cnbc.com/2025/04/29/satya-nadella-says-as-much-a...

      2: https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/s/LOMPaSv3wY

    • jampekka 23 minutes ago
      The instability started well before vibecoding, in around 2018-2019, shortly after the Microsoft acquisition.

      https://damrnelson.github.io/github-historical-uptime/

      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47591928

      • chilmers 19 minutes ago
        This gets posted every time GitHub is down. This chart is not accurate. It is based on data scraped from GitHub's status page and that data is missing historical incidents from the pre-Microsoft era.
        • sarchertech 8 minutes ago
          Yeah, it’s not even consistent with their own incident history. I spot checked it and consistently found incidents with downtime/elevated error rates in months listed as 100.00000% uptime on that chart.
    • insanitybit 31 minutes ago
      It's (a) they're under massively increased load because everyone's vibing up new projects these days, (b) they've been in a weird frankenstein "on azure but also we have our own control plane" state for years and they're pushing to no longer have that be the case.

      I don't think vibecoding at Github has much to do with it.

      • altern8 30 minutes ago
        Ah, yes. A lot more repos, commits, and most importantly huge PRs.

        That makes sense. Thank you!

        • gilrain 24 minutes ago
          No, it doesn’t. Their competition is not similarly unstable, despite existing in the same world of LLMs. Think critically.
          • datsci_est_2015 16 minutes ago
            Devil’s advocate, Pareto heuristic would let us speculate that 80% of LLM traffic would be aimed directly at the largest provider, i.e. GitHub.
    • coreyh14444 17 minutes ago
      I personally trigger github actions approximately 50x more than I did prior to AI-driven developer coding and I'm not alone.
    • cebert 29 minutes ago
      GitHub had a blog post about this recently. They reported a significant uptick in volume (repos created, PRs, etc.), which they attribute to AI usage and tooling.
      • gilrain 26 minutes ago
        Do you really believe their competition hasn’t seen the same increase? Because their competition certainly hasn’t seen the same instability issues.
  • kminehart 30 minutes ago
    Are there any GitHub Actions-compatible CI services out there that don't rely on their infrastructure? I know of depot's but no others; are these resilient to these outages or do they still lose functionality? I imagine the latter but I don't know.
    • 4lun 14 minutes ago
      We currently use external runners (Blacksmith.sh), but that didn't shield us from this as GitHub actions is still the control plane for triggering and monitoring them.

      We're now considering Buildkite (apparently they have a GH actions migration tool) or self hosting something (GitLab CI, maybe even Jenkins), as it looks like that would've kept ticking over since we're still seeing webhooks being triggered today during the downtime.

      • kylegalbraith 12 minutes ago
        Try Depot CI as well. Supports a GHA syntax but the entire control plane is ours with our own engine.
    • kylegalbraith 19 minutes ago
      Founder of Depot here. To my knowledge, we are the first engine to support different syntaxes in this compatible way via Depot CI [0]. Great time to try it out and let us know your thoughts! We’ve built a lot of cool stuff into it like parallel steps, custom images, and a full CLI/API interface so you can literally everything without going into the web app.

      [0] https://depot.dev

      • heeton 12 minutes ago
        As someone who partially uses depot but was still affected by this github issue, we obviously haven't moved over enough. We use your runners but github is still blocking us.

        Hope you don't mind the public ask, it seems useful for others.

        If we're using depot runners, and want to use them directly, or move off of github actions being the controller for when things run: what do you suggest?

        Trigger the workflows directly on depot via CLI?

      • kevinminehart 5 minutes ago
        Are you able to bring your own runners? Our org is heavily invested in self-hosted runners at this point and have gotten a pretty tremendous value from it. I think we'd be wise to get away from GitHub's control plane but keep running jobs in our own infra.
        • heeton 0 minutes ago
          [delayed]
    • conroydave 25 minutes ago
      github actions themselves can be self hosted, its quite nice actually to be able to keep your same patterns as cloud hosted actions and with one line change to the yaml have it running on your own hardware. I do this for actions that take 6-7 hours so I am not burning through the 3000 minutes that come free with my account.
      • mdrachuk 17 minutes ago
        Self-hosted action runners are not working too right now.
      • kminehart 17 minutes ago
        This isn't resilient to this downtime though. Our self-hosted runners are currently not functioning because of some github dependency.
    • ttouch 19 minutes ago
      there are a couple and have very good reputation - though I've never used them

      https://www.blacksmith.sh/ and https://runs-on.com/

      They also say that they're much cheaper than github

      • kevinminehart 0 minutes ago
        I think both of these provide nodes that are scheduled using GitHub's control plane. They would also not be working right now.
  • hkleppe 6 minutes ago
    I've started spending each github outage planning our move to an alternative. I guess I'm not alone. Where are you all moving?
  • moonrailgun 0 minutes ago
    my work is totally stop. cry
  • dsco 12 minutes ago
    Yeah I'm getting an error where it says account has been suspended. They really are becoming an embarassment
  • liamdoyle 3 minutes ago
    Has anyone actually moved off? If so where?

    I like being able to vote with my (teams) wallet and I'm tired of staying out of convenience

  • nivekney 35 minutes ago
    This is outrageous. Someone go create a Polymarket.
  • cebert 36 minutes ago
    I think we should start betting if GitHub will be down on Polymarkets or something at this point.
    • fidotron 33 minutes ago
      The future of SRE will be the company putting some amount of money on a prediction market against the site going down and you get to take home the winnings as long as the site stays up.
  • baalimago 32 minutes ago
    Hey at least Copilot AI Model Providers have 100% uptime, so there's that
    • comboy 20 minutes ago
      I have fun somebody imaging somebody internally explaining that this is a heavy traffic page and we should use it to increase reach.
  • carreau 9 minutes ago
    i still can't see many pull requests in a bunch of repositories... it's been over a month
  • couAUIA 25 minutes ago
    LoL they added "Copilot AI Model Providers" in githubstatus and it has 100% up time.

    Thanks for pointing out that nobody is using that thing

  • chocrates 25 minutes ago
    Someone said GitHub is racing to the mythical "zero nines of availability" and I love it
    • Andrex 16 minutes ago
      Hmm... 88.8888888%?

      Jesus, that's both horrible and seems within reach.

  • rock_artist 20 minutes ago
    Super odd make productivity useless
  • mohsen1 35 minutes ago
    oh man spent so much time trying to debug what's going on. I have a complex setup with GitHub Actions and self hosted runners so I thought it's something broken in my CI setup
  • gib444 21 minutes ago
    List of things "DoS"d by AI:

    - GitHub

    - Hiring budgets

    - RAM (/personal computing in general)

    - Electricity

    - Media/Content

    - Truth

  • throwatdem12311 33 minutes ago
    When is it up?
    • SideburnsOfDoom 23 minutes ago
      Github is more likely to be up before noon in UTC timezone. i.e. before the majority of US users are online and causing load.

      Or maybe it's before the GitHub internal devs are online and deploying changes.

  • sh-cho 32 minutes ago
    'Degraded' should be banned in status pages. It sounds just irresponsible, like "Yeah, it can be slow or something sometime. Whatever. Who cares"
    • jaapz 3 minutes ago
      How would you call "available, but only sometimes"?
    • Andrex 14 minutes ago
      Straight-up, "degraded" should strictly mean "may be slower, or so slow it randomly fails" on these kinds of status pages.
  • sylware 29 minutes ago
    microsoft github should work at restoring interop with noscript/basic HTML browsers...
    • matt_kantor 18 minutes ago
      I agree, but that's not at all related to this outage.
  • aa-jv 13 minutes ago
    Too many times we've been bitten by this - it has been an issue too many times to count.

    This is why we don't use Github Actions, kids.

    Seriously, its a proprietary build service that puts the keys to the kingdom in someone elses' control. Just: No!

    Print this status page to PDF so you've got it handy next time someone castigates you for not using Github Actions, folks.

  • rvz 33 minutes ago
    Another outage at GitHub with actions and pages not working thanks to the AI agents Copilot and Tay.ai creating more issues. Last time this happened was 6 days ago. [0]

    This time today it was caused by friendly fire by the automatic suspension of the GitHub Actions bot which is now a "Ghost" user. Since there is no CEO of GitHub to contact it we are just going to see more [1] of this again.

    You might need to push a critical change soon, but now you cannot. You won't get any of these issues if you self hosted as I said 6 years ago...[2]

    [0] https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/g6ffrm0rfvz9

    [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48085501

    [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22867803

  • galaxdb 10 minutes ago
    [flagged]