Many teams work exclusively in GitHub (ticketing, boards, workflows, dev builds). People also have entire production build systems on GitHub. There's a lot more than git repo hosting.

I'm a firm believer that almost nothing except public services needs that kind of uptime... We've introduced ridiculous amounts of complexity to our infra to achieve this and we've contributed to the increasing costs of both services and development itself (the barrier of entry for current juniors is insane compared to what I've had to deal with in my early 20s).

As an example, Go build could fail anywhere if a dependency module from Github is not available.

Lots of teams embraced actions to run their CI/CD, and GitHub reviews as part of their merge process. And copilot. Basically their SOC2 (or whatever) says they have to use GitHub.

I’m guessing they’re regretting it.

The money i pay them is the reason

What if you need to deploy to production urgently...

I think this is being downvoted unfairly. I mean, sure, as a company accepting payment for services, being down for a few hours every few months is notably bad by modern standards.

But the inward-looking point is correct: git itself is a distributed technology, and development using it is distributed and almost always latency-tolerant. To the extent that github's customers have processes that are dependent on services like bug tracking and reporting and CI to keep their teams productive, that's a bug with the customer's processes. It doesn't have to be that way and we as a community can recognize that even if the service provider kinda sucks.

Are you kidding? I need my code to pass CI, and get reviewed, so I can move on, otherwise the PRs just keep piling. You might as well say the lights could go out, you can do paperwork.