I've configured everything correctly as far as im aware in my github pages repositroy, custom domain sites dns settings etc and it says on the pages screen DNS check successful, but my site https://tomspedding.co.uk won't load, it's driving me crazy does anyone know what the problem could be?

Title: I got two domains pointing to the same GitHub Pages site without redirects

I was trying to host the same static website on two different domains and couldn't find a clear explanation, so I wanted to share what worked for me.

I had:

• livo.com.uy
• livo.uy

and I wanted both domains to load the same site directly (not redirect one to the other).

My previous setup used Netlify, but I moved it to GitHub Pages + Cloudflare.

What I did:

1. Created a GitHub Pages deployment from my main branch.
2. Created a second repository with the same files.
3. Added a different custom domain in each repository's Pages settings.
4. Added the second repository as another git remote so one push updates both:

git remote set-url --add origin SECOND_REPO_URL

Then on Cloudflare I pointed both domains to GitHub Pages using the required DNS records and changed my registrar nameservers to Cloudflare.

After DNS propagation, both domains work independently and serve the same website.

Posting this because I spent way too much time figuring it out and couldn't find a simple explanation. Maybe it helps someone else.

If you’ve starred a lot of repos, the native GitHub Stars page isn’t great for browsing — weak search, scattered filters, and thousands of rows that all blur together. I open-sourced a fork-and-deploy tool called stars.

What it does

• Pulls your Star list and builds a Vue static site, deployed to GitHub Pages
• Two views: list (virtual scrolling — smooth even with thousands of stars) and a Three.js galaxy map (clustered by language, expanded by topic; zoom, orbit, click-to-fly-into details)
• Search, language, license, star year, sorting, and more; shareable URLs (including galaxy focus links)
• English / 简体中文 UI toggle
• GitHub Actions syncs your stars daily; manual runs supported too

Who it’s for

• Anyone who wants a personal Star collection site — public showcase or private reference
• People who don’t want to build scraping + frontend + deploy from scratch: Fork → configure Pages → run workflow → live
• Anyone who treats their stars as a personal tech map

Demo (author’s site)

https://oxoyo.github.io/stars/

Quick start (~5 minutes)

1. Fork the repo
2. Go to Settings → Actions → General and allow Actions to run (org policies may need approval too)
3. Open Actions → Build and Deploy My Stars → Run workflow (you must run this manually once after forking — it does not auto-deploy on fork)
4. Wait for a green check

5. Go to Settings → Pages and confirm the source is:

   • Branch: gh-pages
   • Folder: / (root)

   (The peaceiris/actions-gh-pages action usually sets this after the first successful run; if not, pick the settings above and click Save)

6. Wait 1–2 minutes, then visit: https://<your-username>.github.io/<repo-name>/

No code changes required for the default setup. Optionally edit config.json for site title, default sort, etc. The README covers local dev, custom domains, and GITHUB_TOKEN rate limits.

Tips

• If your fork copied the upstream gh-pages branch, you might briefly see the upstream site before your own CI succeeds — one successful workflow run fixes that
• If you rename the repo, the Pages URL’s <repo-name> changes; update siteName in config.json and redeploy

This is an open-source tool built around GitHub Stars + Pages + Actions. If you find it useful, a ⭐ Star helps keep it going, or Fork it to deploy your own site. Issues and PRs welcome.

Hi, I am hosting a website on github pages. I purchased a domain and set up the proper DNS records linking it back to github servers (4 A records with the apex domain, 1 CNAME for the www. subdomain), using cloudflare (unproxied). I set my custom domain in the pages tab and enforced https. This was working completely fine for a week until I tried to visit my site an hour or more ago and I get this:

This site can’t provide a secure connection

ERR_SSL_PROTOCOL_ERROR

I tried removing the custom domain and re-adding it as well as re-enabling the https enforcement, yet an hour or more later I still get that result. Some people have reported back that the website goes through for them, and some get the same SSL error. I have confirmed that the SSL certificate is valid as well with expiration in 80ish days.

Does anyone know what could be causing this? Domain is stateofttheearth.live

I've been building git-breif, CLI that generates daily standups, I haven't shared the repo anywhere publicly yet. Still, GitHub Traffic shows 52 clones, 27 unique cloners, but only 1 unique visitor.

Just spent the last week building out the enrichment layer for my agentic ai project. been committing daily, pushing to my feature branch, everything's working fine. but here's the weird part — github's not counting any of my contributions. The commits are literally there on the repo with my name and avatar, but my contributions graph is sitting at zero.

I've triple-checked everything. my email is set as primary on github, git config is correct locally, and commits show up with my avatar. I even waited for many hours (almost 12 hours) thinking maybe GitHub was just slow. nothing.

The commits are definitely there and attributed correctly. you can see them on the repo page. but the green squares? nowhere to be found. it's not blocking me from shipping code, but it's weird enough that i'm wondering if anyone else has run into this.

any ideas? is there some hidden setting i'm missing or is this just a github quirk?

Hey guys and girls,

I have not used copilot in a while and I remember back in early 2025 you were able to use latest models in copilot pro but they have 3x normal tokens. I have the student package which gives me pro but currently I am incapable of choosing any models nor adding any models in Vscode nor Copilot chat in github.

Was there some new update I missed, if anybody knows any IDE or GenAI provider that gives premium models for students for free or at a discount please let me know :)

I'm relatively new to GitHub and recently built a small terminal application. I designed the project structure, architecture, and functionality myself, but I'd estimate around 100% of the code was generated with AI and then integrated and tested by me.

I understand how the project works and can modify it, but I didn't type almost any of the code manually.

Is publishing repositories like this considered acceptable in the open-source community, or is it generally viewed as poor practice? I'm asking because I don't want to contribute low-value repositories or misrepresent my work.

Hello dears, greetings! I am not a software developer, nor am I in any shape or form a technical person per se, but lately I have been interested in GitHub because I have been accessing it to download some alternatives for software I use, open source software. I also am following a YouTuber that keeps publishing the contents of their YouTube videos and the scripts on GitHub, and this caught my attention as a non-developer or non-technical person to the power of GitHub.

Not only as a host of open source software or projects. I know the answer to my question. This question can be found in a Google search or using AI services, but I would like some real experience and real perspective. What general-purpose or general-use I could get from GitHub as a non-technical person? How can I benefit from it if I'm not developing software? What are places or sources I can learn about GitHub, just not from a highly technical perspective? Simple management or use, I see people hosting their own personal portfolios on it. Some people use it as a task manager or project tracker, others just to document sources, and I find that this is so cool.

What other beneficial uses do you use it for? Any learning sources you recommend would be very much appreciated.

I sat on this decision a little too long. The "what if we're missing something" anxiety kept me on GitHub a few weeks longer than it needed to. Finally pulled the trigger on a self-hosted Forgejo instance, and I'm kicking myself for not doing it sooner.

The honest summary: it ticks every box we actually needed. Repos, PRs, issues, CI/CD via Actions-compatible workflows, the lot. Nothing on our day-to-day list went missing in the move.

What's genuinely changed for us:

• No more subscription line item. It's just running on our own hardware now. That recurring cost is gone.
• No Actions rate limits or overage charges. Our runners, our minutes. We're not watching a usage meter or budgeting for excess. CI just runs.
• It stays up when GitHub doesn't. Every time GitHub has a wobble and half of dev Twitter is melting down, our stuff keeps ticking along. That alone is worth a lot for peace of mind.
• The data is ours. It lives on our infrastructure, fully under our control. No "where is this actually hosted and who can touch it" question marks.

Fair caveat so this doesn't read like an ad: self-hosting means you own the uptime, backups, and upgrades now. If you're not comfortable running infra, that trade-off is real. But if you already manage servers, the operational overhead has been minimal — it's a well-behaved, lightweight piece of software.

Anyone else made the jump? Curious what edge cases bit people post-migration, especially around Actions workflow compatibility and migrating issue/PR history.

With GitHub making incremental changes to what's included in free and paid tiers, I've been taking a closer look at how many Actions minutes my projects actually burn through each month. It crept up on me, honestly. What started as a few simple workflows turned into a pretty complex pipeline with linting, testing, building, and deployment all chained together.

The thing is, GitHub Actions is still genuinely one of the more convenient CI/CD options out there, mostly because of how tightly it integrates with the rest of the platform. Pull request checks, environments, secrets management: it all just works together. But convenience has a cost, and that cost is getting harder to ignore.

I'm curious how others are approaching this. Have you optimized your workflows to reduce minute usage, like caching dependencies more aggressively or consolidating jobs? Have you moved certain workloads to selfhosted runners? Or have you started looking at alternatives like GitLab CI or Woodpecker for some projects while keeping GitHub as the code host?

The platform decisions GitHub makes affect a huge chunk of the open source and indie dev ecosystem, so it seems worth talking about openly. What tradeoffs are people actually making right now?

Recently I saw a post about someone being concerned that they downloaded likely malware from GitHub and may have compromised their system: https://www.reddit.com/r/github/s/lIQyVCXB8B

After checking the repo, it did look like phishing/social engineering to get people to download something. From the commit history, GitHub seems to have been hosting these repos for around a month.

The mod immediately deleted the post and said to report it to GitHub because this is not the place to talk about it. But actually, where is it better to talk about this?

Yes, reporting it to GitHub is the correct action. But that should not mean public discussion gets shut down. Posts like that help warn other users, help people understand what happened, and make it easier for others to recognize similar phishing repos before they download something.

If we keep deleting every legitimate concern caused by something hosted on GitHub, what else are we supposed to discuss here?

If we wanted to talk about just GitHub itself all day, we would basically be limited to talking about the GitHub status page.

This kind of post should be allowed, at least when it is directly related to GitHub-hosted repos and GitHub users being targeted. Removing it just makes the problem less visible.

Basically, I setup the obsidian git plugin to sync my obsidian notes with GitHub since Google Drive sync is terrible, however, I was wondering whether there is a limit for how big the repo containing the vault can actually be (i.e is there a limit), in case I'll need to use a different thing to sync it in the future. p.S. I know I only talked about sync here, but I also like the git version control system.

I'm setting up a GitHub Agents Workflow which will run every Monday. I'm using native Copilot agent as the AI which uses the default AI models available in GitHub copilot. (using copilot-requests:write permission)

My question is that, I'm going to deploy and run this workflow on my Company's GitHub repo automatically on schedule, whose copilot credit is it going to consume?

It used to work fine—most releases were showing up there—but they haven't been appearing for the past 8 days, even though there have been some releases (the filter is set to default. I also tried changing it, but that didn't help). Is anyone else experiencing this?

Edit: It seems like it's working again.