Yes but that tracks issues of all severities and with all of GitHub’s services of which there are a great many.

Yes. Remember there are two different main types of github users.

1. Devs who just use github as a repo host, and maybe as an issue tracker
2. Devs who use github for everything. Repo hosting, issue tracking, CI/CD pipelines, linting, testing, deployments, code editing, auth providing, and LLM slop generation.

Users in the first group won't notice anything going wrong until only the services they use are affected.

Also “days since incident” is a terrible metric because it doesn’t capture how long the incidents last.

Users in the second group experience full blown "intelligence brownouts" when any service goes down because they're coupled so strongly together. That's why that metric is useful (and also because it shows the true "number of nines" used in SLAs).

And, github is doing every insidious trick they know to push group 1 users into becoming group 2 users.

So yes. I am not sure GitHub is worse.

If github weren't trying to force users into the second group, then I think we could give them some more leeway here. But they're not, so yes github is much much worse.

[...] For example the latest incident is that copilot had degraded performance with Fable due to an Anthropic issue. It only last 18 minutes, only affected part of a part of their service, and it wasn’t even their fault!

That’s very different to “all of GitHub is down for 7 hours”.

If you want something a bit more granular, then you can check: https://mrshu.github.io/github-statuses/