Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

What happens if I am, and now my developers suddenly start to produce changes much faster? Like, one developer now produces the volume of five.

Would you keep charging the same rate per head?



why wouldn't you? these are easily compressible text files. storing even like 100x into a 400 day (at most, the default for GH is 90) box is downright cheap to do on even massive scales.

it's 2025, for log files and a spicy cron daemon (you pay for the artifact storage), it's practically free to do so. this isn't like the days of Western Union where paying $0.35 to send some data across the world is a good deal


If that's the case, why all the fuzz?

All the people complaining can just tap into this almost-free and acessible cheap resource you are referring to instead.


we don't need it. we need to run our CI jobs on resources we manage ourselves, and GitHub have started charging per-minute for it. apples and cannonballs


no, I'd cut the monthly seat cost and grow my user base to include more low-volume devs

but realistically, publishing a web page is practically free. you could be sending 100x as much data and I would still be laughing all the way to the bank


Publishing the page is only the last step. It's orchestrating the stuff THEN publishing it.

If you think that's easy, do it for me. I have some projects to migrate, give me the link of your service.


> If you think that's easy

I think it's cheap to maintain. let me know how many devs you have, how many runs you do, and how many tests (by suite) you have, and I can do you up a quote for hosting some Allure reports. can spread the up-front costs over the 3-year monthly commitment if it helps


There are several services I know who offer this for free for open source software, and I really doubt any commercial offerings of that software would charge you extra for what is basic API usage.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: