Updates to GitHub Actions pricing · community · Discussion #182186

You can find all sorts of stuff in there- they're been so neglectful of the self hosted actions that it's embarrassing they're trying to charge for it. They don't release containers that match the runners on the public at all. They don't handle proper rootless docker-in-docker. All issues that have come up repeatedly. If they want to charge for things fine, but actually provide a service that doesn't require your users doing 90% of the work. ... Aside from the pricing change, GH Actions is not a "premium service" that is even worth paying for. The "control plane" suffers from multiple issues (see recent problems about broker / backend problems not relaying the messages) and the GH Actions ecosystem is broken in so many ways (e.g: safe_sleep). … #### ikemo3 Dec 18, 2025 ... I'm an individual developer on the Pro plan, but the included minutes aren't sufficient for my needs, so I separately contract with Ubicloud. Ubicloud is 1/10th the price of GitHub Actions (before this change), but if this additional charge is applied, the total cost becomes 3.5x higher. (In other words, I'd be paying GitHub 2.5x more than Ubicloud!) … #### vwnj84 Dec 19, 2025 ... It was really terrible from an Enterprise standpoint, because budgets are already set for different departments and development teams. They were told that all they needed to pay for was their infrastructure, not the scheduler, since that's a huge part of what they're already paying for with their per-person Enterprise license. Then this was announced, and suddenly here at the end of the year, we get to tell everyone that's already scraping for pennies that there is now an additional unbudgeted cost. And then it's 'postponed' two days after the announcement and managers are flipping out that they cannot budget around this madness. I don't blame them. … Throw in the many UX issues that have been neglected for years (limit on jobs per workflow, concurrency groups canelling jobs instead of queuing, self-hosted runner versions only last a month or two before being rejected, hung logs, outages, no per second billing) and trying to slide in the announcement in December. It seems quite bold of GitHub. … ### molexx Jan 2, 2026 - Please stop applying breaking changes. Whilst they might well be 'best practice' and you might think you've informed us about them in plenty of time, real-world evidence shows this causes disruption and unhappy users.* We use Actions to deploy to production, and if we need a production deployment we NEED a production deployment, I do not want to take several hours out to investigate, fix and test changes to our action that was stable yesterday because of a requirement change you have force-applied to us. Whether you allegedly warned anyone about it months ago or not.