
GitHub Status – Incident on 2019-03-12 - fniephaus
https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/tj58y1kx7tqy
======
msghacq
I’ve been hearing from friends at GitHub and MS that things are on fire
internally. The GitHub employees are in semi-revolt because they think Nat is
integrating too fast with MS. Many people have quit or are being pushed out.
It may actually be for the best because the post-founder/pre-buyout team was
pretty mediocre. Nat is also trying to crack down on some of the more overt
activism in the company. They do “eq” screenings for political fit during the
interview process and he’s trying to get them to stop. They also have a brand
new head of product and engineering. Product was taken from Jason Warner about
two months ago and placed directly under Nat. Sounds really bad and I don’t
expect much turn around.

~~~
ambulancechaser
> They do “eq” screenings for political fit during the interview process and
> he’s trying to get them to stop.

This sounds crazy to me. My last company would freak out if the dev team got
together and discussed the person's politics and if we thought they should be
hired or not based on that. I hope they do stop this.

The more i think about this the crazier it sounds. Imagine a Houston oil
consultancy firm discussing a candidate who applied and asking "when we talked
about lowering taxes, did the inflection in his voice sound real or feigned?".
This is what an "old boys club" looks like.

~~~
debt
"the person's politics"

I interpreted it as a how a person deals with internal politics not what their
political views are. the latter would most definitely be illegal.

~~~
extra88
I don't think the latter* is illegal because it's not discrimination against a
member of a protected class. That doesn't make it okay or that it couldn't
lead to other trouble.

~~~
zephharben
California law provides some protection from discrimination by employers based
on political affiliation or activities. NY state and Washington DC have
similar statutes.

~~~
delinka
But it’s not “affiliation” nor “activities.” It’s “is their stance on topic X
compatible with ours?”

Still terrible. Still not illegal.

------
justinjlynn
Update 1: Info.

Update 2: Same info Again.

Update 3: The same info again phrased differently.

What's the point of giving regular "updates" when you don't add any
information? Is it just to tick a managerial box somewhere?

~~~
jressey
If you're on a flight, do you not appreciate when the pilot updates you, even
if he says "We are still investigating the maintenance issue?"

~~~
gerardnll
It's funny because if you think it carefully it's like you think they look at
the problem for a while and stop until you ask again for updates. haha Like
you need to keep asking for them to work on it. Sounds like an oldschool boss
expecting you to be on your chair even if that doesn't mean you're working.

------
Legogris
This could be just a coincidence, but just now I also noticed HN was down as
well as several global services (non-tech related stuff) we integrate with
that are all timing out. Some deeper infrastructure issues at hand?

------
mcrider
Odd side effect -- I've received three duplicate 'Github Explore' emails about
every hour this morning.

------
rinchik
Yep. Can't view newly open PRs, also random GH related failures in CI

------
Vervious
Travis CI git clone over http is borked as a result.
[https://www.traviscistatus.com/](https://www.traviscistatus.com/)

------
honopu
I wasn't getting 2fa notifications either, haven't tried lately but switched
to google authenticator as a precaution against this happening in the future.

------
MuffinFlavored
Does anybody else feel GH has a much higher than normal incident rate?

~~~
yjftsjthsd-h
Unless they under-report, we shouldn't need to feel anything; we can just
check
[https://www.githubstatus.com/history](https://www.githubstatus.com/history)
and objectively look at frequency. Of course, some services _do_ under-report;
dunno if GH does or not.

~~~
zenexer
The overwhelming majority seem to under-report these days. I can’t tell you
how many conversations I’ve had that go like this:

—

Me: We’re having issues on our site, and we’ve narrowed it down to your
service. Can you confirm that you’ve had a partial outage for the last three
hours?

Them: Yes, about 25% of API calls are failing.

Me: Why is your status page green?

Them: Our team has decided it doesn’t warrant a status update.

—

When this happens, we tend to switch services providers fairly quickly. If
you’re not going to be honest with us, we’re stuck wasting our time
troubleshooting. We don’t care if you have occasional outages—it happens;
that’s why we have fallback providers. But you need to tell us when you’re
down.

tl;dr: Your status page is not an advertisement for your “amazing” uptime.
It’s to make my life easier and save me time/money. Use it for its intended
purpose.

------
zilian
Deploy to github pages delayed for more than an hour here

------
elesbao
that's a shitty incident report and a sad thread if there's this kind of
activism internally while shit is on fire.

------
lhorak
Seem working alright... hmmm

