| ▲ | ncruces 2 hours ago | |
Sorry if I misread your intent. I just think their charts, taken at face value, show substantially the same thing (for PRs, commits, new repos). Either those charts are a bald-faced lie (the tweet could be as well) or there is no way for that chart to be something else. The only way to fake exponential growth like that would be to use an inverse log scale (which would be a bald-faced lie). It doesn't even really matter what's the y-axis baseline, unless we really think growth was huge in 2020, then cratered to zero by 2023, now back to the previous normal. As for the rest of the post, I do think it's panic mode platitudes. But I honestly don't know what I'd write instead that's better. You can already see people complaining loudly where they instead of "we'll do better" decided to limit usage. | ||
| ▲ | maccard an hour ago | parent [-] | |
No problem - it's tough online sometimes. > I just think their charts, taken at face value, show substantially the same thing (for PRs, commits, new repos). The problem is that these charts show the massive exponential growth in 2026. But this didn't start in 2026, this has been going on since early last year. My team had more build failures in 2025 due to actions outages or "degraded performance" than _any other reason_ and that includes PR's that failed linting or tests that developer were working on. > As for the rest of the post, I do think it's panic mode platitudes. But I honestly don't know what I'd write instead that's better. IMO, this needed to be written a 6 months ago (around the time that the memo of them prioritising the migration to Azure was released), and then this post should have been "We're still struggling, this isn't good enough. Here's the amount of growth, here's what we've done to try and fix it, and here's what we're planning over the next 3-6 months", instead of "Our priorities are clear: availability first, then capacity, then new features" and "We are committed to improving availability, increasing resilience, scaling for the future of software development, and communicating more transparently along the way." This isn't transparency (yet). | ||