GitHub degradation affects Cursor Origin, its new Git platform | Hacker News Reader

GitHub degradation affects Cursor Origin, its new Git platform

status.cursor.com

67 pointsKGC3D27 comments

So they announce this to try and take people away from GitHub, but it also depended on GitHub? Am I reading this irony correctly?

In this field rebranding/rebadging things is very common. Cursor is no stranger, they tried to pass off Kimi 2.5 as their own awhile ago.

Pass off? They fine tuned ann open model and were very clear and public about it.

No they were not. Especially if you were an end user, you wouldn't have been able to tell it wasn't their own model. That exactly isn't being clear nor public.

CTRL+F "kimi" 0 results

https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2

Ah our miscommunication here is because I was thinking of Composer 2.5, which does. Good point and that's good to know.

https://cursor.com/blog/composer-2-5

For Composer 2 they got called out on it and only acknowledged after enough criticism.

Here is a link to Lee Robinson saying they will do better to be more transparent with future releases.

> Agree with the feedback we should have mentioned the base up front, we will do that for the next model!

https://x.com/leerob/status/2035073197561745579

If you read the status page:

> This incident affected: Automations, Review Agents, Cloud Agents, and Origin.

Cursor has built a code review bot (https://cursor.com/bugbot) which integrates with Github similar to Greptile/Coderabbit. Origin has a feature which imports existing github repos to onboard new users. Automation and cloud agents is self explanatory.

I just opened cursor and was presented with a modal dialog with a "Try Origin" button and zero option to dismiss it. Had to nuke the cursor process to get it to go away. At least they didn't show it again at relaunch.

Title phrasing sounds like Cursor Origin is GitHub's new Git platform.

It's not, the the good old Cursor's (the IDE) new Git platform.

i see how you could say that but absolutely no one is confused

I was confused. The title is bad. “its” is ambiguous and usually refers to the first subject in this sentence structure.

Tbh this wording actually made Google Translate render it as “GitHub’s new Git platform.” I got confused and had to look at the original English text to understand what it meant.

I assume it's talking about syncing/migrating from github -> origin? And not that github is hte actual upstream of origin? That would be great though

GitHub example shows clearly that service reliability is really overrated. No one is seriously going to leave GitHub because of reliability. Maybe there's some lone power users, but most companies (mine included) don't even discuss it.

Same as Slack: if it down -- it's down, we just wait.

i know of at least a few big orgs that had enough and went on prem. and switched off slack even

This is a weird comment to make as it presumes there's a real alternative. There is barely any real competition yet. I'm sure Cursor won't be the first to start putting pressure on them.

I wouldn't be surprised if Linear starts pushing further into Github's markets as well. They already have a better diff engine than Github.

Gitlab does exist

> No one is seriously going to leave GitHub because of reliability

had a discussion with the team yesterday, literally every one wants to leave and looking for the best alternative

Wanting to leave is not the same as actually leaving. I can imagine small teams leaving because moving a 10-30 member team is easy. If you have a dev team with 500 members and the team has been on GitHub for 10 years, you will just take it because migrating is just a PITA.

> If you have a dev team with 500 members and the team has been on GitHub for 10 years

This so closely describes my company. We’re so fed up with GHA that we’re charting an off ramp. It’s been happening in the background for a few months already but whenever there is a major outage I swear we add one more person to effort.

Migrating sucks but so does having 500 engineers who can’t do any coding work for a day every {month,week}

Not trying to be an ass, but the core git principle is decentralization and local copies.

Maybe it will help to return to a more git oriented workflow instead of a GitHub oriented one.

I think I was imprecise in my last message. When GitHub actions has an outage, engineers at my company can and do still write code. No one can merge though and we aren’t able to deploy (like we normally do) so we very quickly get a huge backlog of PRs that need to be tested / reviewed etc. People generally just pivot towards reviewing code at this point (or doing other non coding work)

When GH has an outage like yesterday, we cant even formally review code. Sure, people could pull others branches and read them and discuss in chat but a dedicated tool for distributed code review is pretty important for most teams. It wasn’t that long ago we were a small company and GH’s reliability wasn’t such a nightmare so using it for what it offers made a lot of sense for the business.

The calculus has changed recently.

Yes, I heard that plans many times. Same as in another case, people have sworn to leave for Canada, if. No one actually did.

I'd be really glad if you do actually, but my hopes are weak.

Also people angrily declare that they will leave, the second the downtime is over that thought already disappears.

from what i read, its just that lots of old features are integrated tightly with github are affected. that is to be expected right?

Cursor Origin Code Hosting

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49334209

Missed opportunity having this being a pro feature, having it free would have paid for itself in training data down the line.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com