Hacker News
points by petecooper 4 days ago | 0 comments
[–] philipwhiuk 4 days ago
It's bizarre they have both this and gitbookstatus.com and they contain different info.
[–] SamyPesse 4 days ago
We summarized more information on this page from recent learnings, than what has been posted as updates on the status page (https://www.gitbookstatus.com/incidents/01M6FXDDGQRWHMYYWXY2...).
[–] philipwhiuk 1 day ago
Just to be clear you have:

* https://www.gitbook.com/status

* https://status.gitbook.com/

* https://www.gitbookstatus.com/

You get why this is confusing, right?

[–] sitzkrieg 4 days ago
the classic failure mechanism in the status page
[–] eddythompson80 4 days ago
Does a security incident page really need to connect to 11 3rd party domains. smh
[–] tmp219380123809 3 days ago
That isn't a dedicated security status page, it's their main website.

The actual status page appears to be hosted on incident.io https://www.gitbookstatus.com/incidents/01M6FXDDGQRWHMYYWXY2...

[–] Panino 4 days ago
If it was made by a web designer, then yes. It's also nice to have 151 HTML warnings and errors:

https://validator.w3.org/nu/?doc=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gitbook.c...

And images that are 4x larger than necessary on the main page (nevermind whether the images add value to begin with):

https://webspeedtest.cloudinary.com/results/261104_YiDc1V_1W

There are maybe 10 websites that look good "inside and out" because web design is a broken field run by non-technical people.

[–] MonstraG 3 days ago
I wanna note that some (52) of those are "css property corner-shape doesn't exist", and it does, just isn't supported in all browsers yet.