| ▲ | flossly 4 hours ago |
| Is it me, or did get issues get a lot worse with the transfer to MSFT? |
|
| ▲ | strictnein 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The purchase wasn't a year ago, it was 8 years ago. In that time how much has it grown? 10x? 100x? More? |
| |
| ▲ | gwbas1c 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's probably due to a more recent change, IE, focusing on features over stability. Or, it could be that there was some turnover in ops and someone who was a hawk about stability isn't there. If I were to bet, there's probably a product manager or other leader who's just gung-ho on new features and loosing track of who their customers are and what their needs are. | | |
| ▲ | hylaride an hour ago | parent [-] | | IMO, it's probably a combination of factors. I get the feeling GitHub has no clear leadership by anybody who actually USES it. The priorities internally were almost certainly "get onto azure, shove copilot/AI down everybody's throat, and other generic "product driven" initiatives. The user-hostile move to react was done in a way that broke browser back-button functionality, especially in Pull Requests. They don't/didn't care because what are you going to do? On one hand, the free users shouldn't complain too much, though I get their anger. But the place I work is an enterprise paying customer and this is bullshit. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | sumtechguy 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| That can happen many times during a buyout. Some company buys a thing. The problem then is ownership of the thing. Who in the new company is going to own the 'make sure it stays good' problem. Sometimes with a buy out the people who were doing that may even stay at the company. But it is a matter of motivation. MS has a real serious problem. You can see the gaps where they have glued together at least 10 companies together and called it microsoft. They have a huge reputational risk issue. Where something breaking in the xbox div can have a negative impact on the tools division. Also the other way around. They lack focus on many items. They have needed a 'service pack 2' stop the presses moment and fix this mount everest of tech debt. |
|
| ▲ | itomato 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yes, of course, but also more recently under the new CoreAI unit: https://www.businessinsider.com/microsoft-ai-coding-rivals-o... |
|
| ▲ | sebastiansm7 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think is more related to vibe coding |
| |
| ▲ | DanielHB 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Definitely not, I remember some 4 years ago some random bug in a github-supported github-action and a comment in an issue saying: "I heard the team responsible for this action was laid off, don't expect a fix". This was shortly after the microsoft acquisition. But the vibe coding BS probably made it 10 times worse. | | |
| ▲ | strictnein 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | > I remember some 4 years ago ... This was shortly after the microsoft acquisition. The acquisition was 8 years ago. | | |
| ▲ | cjbgkagh 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | They started with a hands off approach and then went hands on, I’m not sure but that ‘hands on’ timing is likely to happen shortly after the usual acquisition vesting period of 3 years when the old guard starts to leave. | | |
| ▲ | DanielHB an hour ago | parent [-] | | Yes you are correct, ~4 years ago was when they had a lot of layoffs at microsoft and github. Initially after the acquisition it was mostly fine, but after the layoffs it was a noticeable degradation in service quality and reliability. |
|
| |
| ▲ | embedding-shape 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > But the vibe coding BS probably made it 10 times worse. Yup, keep seeing this in various companies. Teams that were effective and did solid engineering now are more effective and does even better engineering. Teams that were effectively already just "boilerplate monkies" now produce a lot more code than before, but the quality is the same so effectively they're worse at contributing now than before, and take more shortcuts, not less. From my point of view, agents are amplifiers, so if you usually build spaghetti projects, agents just help you do that faster, not avoid the spaghetti altogether. If you usually build well-designed stuff, they can help you put that together faster. |
| |
| ▲ | 2ndorderthought 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Agreed. In general the amount and variety of bugs introduced since everyone started vibing is worrying. It is probably a national security concern but I guess so is the economy tanking due to failed AI investments. Guess we will see | |
| ▲ | threetonesun 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I'm not sure it's specific to vibe coding so much as the AI feature add rush. Every SAAS company is throwing more shit at the wall than I've ever seen, to the point where I'm actively avoiding some software because I don't want yet another new feature release pop-up when I log in. Add in them being extremely high scale and critical infrastructure and it's easy to see where things can go wrong, vibe added code or not. I think we'd all prefer they have long slow roadmaps but clearly leadership thinks they're in a fight with the other AI companies to release the newest and bestest every day. | |
| ▲ | pixelesque 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In terms of at Microsoft's end, or in general with the amount of new repos and pushes / commits from other people vibe-coding? | |
| ▲ | duped 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | GitHub actions sucked and fell over itself long before vibe coding became mainstream. |
|
|
| ▲ | Tade0 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Even after decades, the policy is the same: Embrace, extend, and extinguish. |
| |
| ▲ | glenngillen 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Which was a policy that increased their market dominance for their existing dominate products. What exactly are they extinguishing GitHub to the benefit of? Azure Repos? | | |
| ▲ | cjbgkagh 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Perhaps they can’t help themselves out of habit, it is their nature. The original red dog team that started azure is long gone and the general success of the cloud papers over all levels of incompetence so that the incompetence is now entrenched and unable to do better. Cloud service providers have this unfortunate property where poor designs will make more money which makes it hard to maintain a culture of excellence. I tried to push a design change that would result in a 10x throughput for a certain product and was told that a 90% drop in usage is the last thing they want. I self host my own stuff with GitLab, so far not a single unplanned outage in 6 years. Perhaps a Roman decimation is in order, whenever GitHub experiences an outage fire one GitHub employee at random. That should help get interests in line and allow for cross org cooperation. With 150 outages per year and a staff of 6,000 that amounts to 2.5% per year if no improvements are made. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | hkt 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It is absolutely not just you |
|
| ▲ | UqWBcuFx6NV4r 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Is it just me, or [thing that has been repeated a billion times every day on this and every other website] |
| |
