Infracodebase’s Post

Regardless of where you work, Infracodebase can perform continuous audits at a human level. This not only provides assurance, but evidence for future audits in regulated companies. If you are struggling with the gap between deterministic tests and annual audits, you should reach out.

Ever seen a commit on GitHub attributed to an account that can't even push to the repo? I thought it was a bug. It's not. Let me explain- Spent an hour chasing a git ghost today. 🦞 Pushed commits from my personal GitHub account to a private repo I own. Every commit kept showing up attributed to a different account of mine - one I'd already removed as a collaborator. First instinct: credential leakage. Wrong SSH key. Stale gh token. Something. None of it. The resolution turned out to be a reminder of how git identity actually works. "Committed by X" on a GitHub commit page does NOT mean "X pushed this commit." Git's author / committer / pusher distinction is intentional , it is designed for maintainer workflows where one person applies a patch authored by someone else. Every git push involves three independent identity systems: • SSH key or HTTPS token → who pushed • git config user.email → whose face shows on the commit • gh auth status → who API calls run as Fix the right layer. Sometimes the answer isn't in auth at all. #git #github #devtools #softwareengineering

GitHub is one of the most important platforms for developers and for code in general. But right now, it has no leadership and no CEO.

> GitHub stopped updating its own status page due to terrible availability ... 90.1% uptime - This means ... issues/degradations for 2.5 hours daily ... > GitHub struggles to keep up with the increase in load from AI agents generating more code and pull requests ... Claude Code bot contributions growth in the past 3 months has been enormous ... Stream of outages ... https://lnkd.in/eYHzasTh

GitHub's merge queue silently rewrote main branch history on April 23rd. The pattern: PR shows a +29 / -34 diff. Reviewed, approved, queued. What lands is +245 / -1,137 — thousands of lines of already-shipped code quietly removed. Every merge after that stacks on the broken history. UI shows nothing wrong. GitHub says 2,800 PRs out of 4 million. One company reported 200+ on its own. Pick a number. The part nobody's saying out loud: for history to get overwritten like this, something is force-pushing to main behind the scenes. Branch protection apparently doesn't apply to GitHub itself. Worth thinking about what else moves through that path silently. The deeper issue isn't the bug. Bugs happen. The issue is that "distributed version control" became a single vendor's merge button for most of the industry, and the merge button lied for a day. Git itself was fine the whole time. It always is. I run my own Gitea. Recommend it. #GitHub #Git #DevOps #Gitea #SelfHosted #SoftwareEngineering

Here's How I Recovered My "Missing" Files. Renaming the default branch on GitHub to main isn’t without risk, because it effectively removes the pointer to the commit history that contained the app’s files — that’s why my app appeared broken — some files were “missing”. Under the hood, the files were still in the repository’s history, but unreachable from any active branch, in short, they weren’t in my main. How do I solved it: 1.     Git log –oneline –graph –all 2.     Git log –oneline –decorate –graph –all These commands didn’t change anything—they just helped me see the situation clearly. I noticed: *My old commits were still there *They just weren’t part of main So my work wasn’t gone—it was just on another line of history. 3.     Git merge features This command: * Integrated the commits into main * Created a merge commit (or fast-forwarded) This made those my “missing” commits part of main again. So now, my files reappeared locally 4.     Git push origin main This command updated my remote repo on GitHub so that main now includes those recovered commits, and the files show up again on GitHub 5.     Test/check if it’s all align, run the app. Key takeaway: * Merge before deleting: Never delete a branch until its commits are merged into main. * Push after merge: Keeps GitHub in sync with local repo. Things to remember: ·        A branch or main is just a label pointing to a commit, nothing more. ·        Branches don’t automatically contain the same files. ·        So, deleting a branch does not instantly erase commits, it just removes the label pointing to them. ·        That’s why you can always recover it as long as it’s still within the safe window (reachable). #Git #GitHub #RecoverMissingFiles #Repositories #Programming

So GitHub now lets orgs disable commit comments. I can already hear the collective sigh of relief from maintainers drowning in long-dead discussions on ancient lines of code. Or maybe a collective groan from those who loved the context? Either way, a powerful new admin lever. What's your take on this cleanup? #GitHub #DevOps

𝗠𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗲 𝗚𝗶𝘁𝗛𝘂𝗯 𝗮𝗰𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱𝗻’𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗽𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗳𝘂𝗹… 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀. Over the past few months, I kept running into a frustrating issue: using work + personal GitHub accounts on the same machine without breaking SSH or mixing identities. So I built a clean, repeatable SSH setup that solves the following: • Authentication conflicts • Wrong-account commits • Broken push/pull workflows What’s inside the guide: • Separate SSH keys per account • Smart aliasing via ~/.ssh/config • Per-repo Git identity setup • Quick debugging checks The goal was simple: 👉 Make it predictable and production-safe—not just “works on my machine." If you’ve ever pushed code from the wrong account… you know the pain. 😅 🔗 GitHub repo: https://lnkd.in/dFH75WvV If this helps, consider giving the repo a ⭐ #github #git #ssh #developers #webdev #softwareengineering #opensource

GitHub just hit a wall. Last year the platform celebrated one billion commits across all of 2025. It is now processing 275 million commits per week. That is not more developers. That is AI agents working around the clock. Kyle Daigle, GitHub's COO, posted the numbers directly. 14 billion commits projected for this year if growth stays linear. He added a spoiler: it won't. The platform started breaking in February. 37 separate incidents that month. Then April hit harder. Five outages in the first two days. Agent sessions that normally spin up in 15 to 40 seconds hit 54 minute wait times. At peak load, 84 percent of requests to start an agent session failed. GitHub's VP of Engineering said they planned for 10 times their current capacity back in October. By February they realized they needed to design for 30 times today's scale instead. The deeper issue is structural. AI scales the output side of work incredibly fast. Code review, verification, infrastructure. Those were built for human pace. When output goes 14 times faster and review capacity stays flat, the bottleneck does not disappear. It moves. Every AI rollout Mark is running into hits the same wall. The tool produces faster. The rest of the workflow does not. That gap is where things get expensive.

GitHub may not remain completely free for everyone in the future. You might need to subscribe to a “Pro” plan to continue doing what you can currently do, such as pushing code as often as you want and in any amount you need. #github