Pricing Changes for GitHub Actions
GitHub is shaking up its Actions pricing, cutting hosted runner costs but controversially introducing a new per-minute platform charge that also applies to self-hosted runners. This move has ignited a firestorm among developers, many of whom feel they are now being charged to use their own infrastructure and are questioning GitHub's motives. The Hacker News community is abuzz with outrage, speculating on market dynamics, and actively seeking alternative CI/CD solutions.
The Lowdown
GitHub has announced significant changes to its Actions pricing, aiming to reflect growth, improve reliability, and modernize its underlying architecture. The company states that the platform now handles over three times its previous job volume and seeks to align pricing with consumption patterns. These changes, GitHub argues, will foster a faster, more reliable CI/CD experience and a scalable platform for future "agentic workloads," aiming to meet the needs of both large enterprises and individual developers.
- Lower GitHub-hosted runner prices: Prices for GitHub-hosted runners are being reduced by up to 39% across various machine types, effective January 1, 2026. This reduction incorporates a new $0.002 per-minute "Actions cloud platform charge."
- New Platform Charge for All Actions Workflows: A flat $0.002 per-minute "Actions cloud platform charge" is introduced for all Actions workflows, whether run on GitHub-hosted or self-hosted runners. This charge is included in the new GitHub-hosted runner rates.
- Impact on Self-Hosted Runners: The new platform charge will apply to self-hosted runners starting March 1, 2026, meaning users will now pay a fee for the orchestration of jobs on their own infrastructure. Public repositories and GitHub Enterprise Server customers remain unaffected.
- Deepened Investment in Self-Hosted Experience: GitHub promises increased investment in its self-hosted experience, including a new lightweight Go SDK for custom autoscaling (GitHub Scale Set Client), reintroduction of multi-label support, improvements to the Actions Runner Controller (ARC), and a new Actions Data Stream for enhanced observability.
- Stated Impact: GitHub claims 85% of affected Actions users will see their bills decrease, with only 0.09% of individual (free & Pro) users seeing an increase (median under $2/month).
The Gossip
A Penny for Your Thoughts (and Your Own Hardware)
The most vocal sentiment is outrage over the new $0.002 per-minute charge for self-hosted runners. Many users feel betrayed and exploited, viewing it as a "GitHub encrapification" or being charged to use their own computers. This is seen as a direct attack on cost-saving strategies and a punitive measure for those who've invested in their own infrastructure due to performance or security needs. The comparison to Netflix's market-squeeze tactics is frequently made, implying a lack of customer focus.
Corporate Calculations and Competitive Crushing
Commenters speculate on GitHub's motivations behind the pricing change. Many believe it's an anti-competitive move designed to suppress third-party runner providers who offer cheaper and faster alternatives to GitHub's own hosted runners. Others attribute it to post-ZIRP (Zero Interest Rate Policy) economic realities, where companies are pressured to monetize every aspect of their services, or simply to GitHub's "Microsoft-like" strategy of embrace, extend, and extinguish. The idea that GitHub needs to recoup costs for the 'control plane' of Actions is acknowledged by some, but the per-minute billing for self-hosted resources is broadly criticized as unfair.
The Great Migration: Fleeing the GitHub Flock
A significant portion of the discussion revolves around finding alternatives. Many users express intentions to migrate away from GitHub Actions, or even GitHub entirely. Gitea and Forgejo are frequently mentioned as self-hosted git forge alternatives with compatible CI, while Jenkins and Buildkite are brought up as alternative CI/CD platforms. Some suggest returning to more manual, local build processes or creating bespoke solutions. Companies offering alternative hosted runners are also highlighted as viable options, despite the new fee.
Actions' Achilles' Heel: Quality and Cost Quandaries
Underlying the pricing debate is a consistent thread of dissatisfaction with the existing quality and reliability of GitHub Actions. Users describe the platform as "fragile," "slow," "unreliable," and having "rough edges" and long-standing bugs. This pre-existing frustration exacerbates the anger over new charges, as many feel they are paying more for a service that already underperforms compared to competitors or even internal, self-managed systems. The slow pace of feature development and perceived neglect of the CI platform (in favor of AI) is also a common complaint.
The Budgetary Breakdown: From Pennies to Pain Points
Commenters analyze the concrete financial impact of the new $0.002/minute charge. While GitHub claims minimal impact for most users, many detail how their specific usage patterns (e.g., long-running builds, large monorepos, frequent cron jobs) could lead to significant monthly increases, ranging from tens to hundreds of dollars. The debate includes arguments that for large enterprises, even substantial costs might be negligible compared to engineering salaries, while others emphasize that any charge for using one's own hardware is fundamentally unacceptable, regardless of the amount. Practical advice on optimizing workflows to minimize minute consumption is also shared.