GitHub walks back plan to charge for self-hosted runners
(2025/12/17)
- Reference: 1765992395
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2025/12/17/github_charge_dev_own_hardware/
- Source link:
updated Following publication of our original article, GitHub reversed its decision. The Microsoft-owned developer site has taken to X to admit it might have made a mistake by unilaterally announcing plans to charge people for using their own hardware to host runners.
“We’ve read your posts and heard your feedback,” GitHub [1]said . “We’re postponing the announced billing change for self-hosted GitHub Actions to take time to re-evaluate our approach.”
The company said that it still intends to do something to help offset the “real costs” in running GitHub Actions via self-hosted runners, but “we missed the mark with this change by not including more of you in our planning.”
[2]
GitHub said that it’s open to user feedback on whatever changes may come next, and opened a community discussion [3]thread for users who want to weigh in. We note that GitHub didn’t say it won’t ever go forward with charging for self-hosted runners, only that it’s postponing the change. As one commenter on the community thread pointed out, that means charging for self-hosted runners may be a foregone conclusion.
[4]
[5]
The original article is below:
GitHub customers, take notice: Come March, the Microsoft-owned repository host will begin charging for some uses of self-hosted Actions runners.
[6]
The change comes in the form of a [7]$0.002 per minute charge for self-hosted runners executing jobs on private GitHub repositories. At the same time, GitHub noted in a Tuesday [8]blog post that it's lowering the prices of GitHub-hosted runners beginning January 1, under a scheme it calls "simpler pricing and a better experience for GitHub Actions." Self-hosted runner usage on public repositories will remain free, we note.
Regardless of the public repo distinction, enterprise-scale developers who rely on self-hosted runners were predictably not pleased about the announcement.
"Github have just sent out an email announcing a $0.002/minute fee for self-hosted runners," Reddit user markmcw [9]posted on the DevOps subreddit. "Just ran the numbers, and for us, that's close to $3.5k a month extra on our GitHub bill."
[10]
The powers-that-be at GitHub owner Microsoft seem to understand that the change to self-hosted runner billing would piss off a number of customers, as the very first question in the FAQ attached to Tuesday's blog post is "why am I being charged to use my own hardware?"
To be fair to GitHub, it’s not exactly free for the company to run the GitHub Actions infrastructure and services that self-hosted runners rely on, and that’s the company’s justification for the change.
"Historically, self-hosted runner customers were able to leverage much of GitHub Actions' infrastructure and services at no cost," the repo host said in its blog FAQ. "This meant that the cost of maintaining and evolving these essential services was largely being subsidized by the prices set for GitHub-hosted runners."
The move, GitHub said, will align costs more closely with usage. Like many similar changes to pricing models pushed by tech firms, GitHub says "the vast majority of users … will see no price increase."
GitHub claims that 96 percent of its customers will see no change to their bill, and that 85 percent of the 4 percent affected by the pricing update will actually see their Actions costs decrease. The company says the remaining 15 percent of impacted users will face a median increase of about $13 a month.
For those using self-hosted runners and worried about increased costs, GitHub has updated its [11]pricing calculator to include the cost of self-hosted runners.
[12]GitHub head ankles as Microsoft takes biz by the hand
[13]Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features
[14]Zig quits GitHub, says Microsoft's AI obsession has ruined the service
[15]New GitHub Copilot limits push AI users to pricier tiers
As the company noted, it's also decreasing the costs of many GitHub-hosted runners, and while some will be up to 39 percent less, self-hosted runners can still work out cheaper for teams with their own hardware. The cheapest standard GitHub hosted runners using a 1-core Linux system come in at the same price as $0.002 per minute for a self-hosted runner, and haven't been adjusted under the new pricing scheme.
Many [16]commenters concerned over the self-hosted runner price change also expressed worry that their runners would eat into free quota minutes associated with their GitHub plan, and that appears to be a valid concern.
"Billable self-hosted runner usage will be able to consume minutes from the free quota associated with your plan," GitHub said. In other words, the time spent using runners on your own hardware will eat into your free time and further increase your GitHub costs.
"We believe this is a sustainable option that will not deeply impact our lightly- nor heavily-active customers, while still delivering fast, flexible workloads for the best end user experience," GitHub said. ®
Get our [17]Tech Resources
[1] https://x.com/github/status/2001372894882918548
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/182186
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://docs.github.com/en/billing/reference/actions-runner-pricing
[8] https://github.blog/changelog/2025-12-16-coming-soon-simpler-pricing-and-a-better-experience-for-github-actions/
[9] https://www.reddit.com/r/devops/comments/1po8hj5/github_actions_introducing_a_perminute_fee_for/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://github.com/pricing/calculator#actions
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/11/github_head_ankles_as_microsoft/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/05/github_copilot_complaints/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/02/zig_quits_github_microsoft_ai_obsession/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/20/github_begins_enforcing_premium_request/
[16] https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1po9dft/github_self_hosted_action_costs_now/
[17] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
“We’ve read your posts and heard your feedback,” GitHub [1]said . “We’re postponing the announced billing change for self-hosted GitHub Actions to take time to re-evaluate our approach.”
The company said that it still intends to do something to help offset the “real costs” in running GitHub Actions via self-hosted runners, but “we missed the mark with this change by not including more of you in our planning.”
[2]
GitHub said that it’s open to user feedback on whatever changes may come next, and opened a community discussion [3]thread for users who want to weigh in. We note that GitHub didn’t say it won’t ever go forward with charging for self-hosted runners, only that it’s postponing the change. As one commenter on the community thread pointed out, that means charging for self-hosted runners may be a foregone conclusion.
[4]
[5]
The original article is below:
GitHub customers, take notice: Come March, the Microsoft-owned repository host will begin charging for some uses of self-hosted Actions runners.
[6]
The change comes in the form of a [7]$0.002 per minute charge for self-hosted runners executing jobs on private GitHub repositories. At the same time, GitHub noted in a Tuesday [8]blog post that it's lowering the prices of GitHub-hosted runners beginning January 1, under a scheme it calls "simpler pricing and a better experience for GitHub Actions." Self-hosted runner usage on public repositories will remain free, we note.
Regardless of the public repo distinction, enterprise-scale developers who rely on self-hosted runners were predictably not pleased about the announcement.
"Github have just sent out an email announcing a $0.002/minute fee for self-hosted runners," Reddit user markmcw [9]posted on the DevOps subreddit. "Just ran the numbers, and for us, that's close to $3.5k a month extra on our GitHub bill."
[10]
The powers-that-be at GitHub owner Microsoft seem to understand that the change to self-hosted runner billing would piss off a number of customers, as the very first question in the FAQ attached to Tuesday's blog post is "why am I being charged to use my own hardware?"
To be fair to GitHub, it’s not exactly free for the company to run the GitHub Actions infrastructure and services that self-hosted runners rely on, and that’s the company’s justification for the change.
"Historically, self-hosted runner customers were able to leverage much of GitHub Actions' infrastructure and services at no cost," the repo host said in its blog FAQ. "This meant that the cost of maintaining and evolving these essential services was largely being subsidized by the prices set for GitHub-hosted runners."
The move, GitHub said, will align costs more closely with usage. Like many similar changes to pricing models pushed by tech firms, GitHub says "the vast majority of users … will see no price increase."
GitHub claims that 96 percent of its customers will see no change to their bill, and that 85 percent of the 4 percent affected by the pricing update will actually see their Actions costs decrease. The company says the remaining 15 percent of impacted users will face a median increase of about $13 a month.
For those using self-hosted runners and worried about increased costs, GitHub has updated its [11]pricing calculator to include the cost of self-hosted runners.
[12]GitHub head ankles as Microsoft takes biz by the hand
[13]Let us git rid of it, angry GitHub users say of forced Copilot features
[14]Zig quits GitHub, says Microsoft's AI obsession has ruined the service
[15]New GitHub Copilot limits push AI users to pricier tiers
As the company noted, it's also decreasing the costs of many GitHub-hosted runners, and while some will be up to 39 percent less, self-hosted runners can still work out cheaper for teams with their own hardware. The cheapest standard GitHub hosted runners using a 1-core Linux system come in at the same price as $0.002 per minute for a self-hosted runner, and haven't been adjusted under the new pricing scheme.
Many [16]commenters concerned over the self-hosted runner price change also expressed worry that their runners would eat into free quota minutes associated with their GitHub plan, and that appears to be a valid concern.
"Billable self-hosted runner usage will be able to consume minutes from the free quota associated with your plan," GitHub said. In other words, the time spent using runners on your own hardware will eat into your free time and further increase your GitHub costs.
"We believe this is a sustainable option that will not deeply impact our lightly- nor heavily-active customers, while still delivering fast, flexible workloads for the best end user experience," GitHub said. ®
Get our [17]Tech Resources
[1] https://x.com/github/status/2001372894882918548
[2] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[3] https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/182186
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[7] https://docs.github.com/en/billing/reference/actions-runner-pricing
[8] https://github.blog/changelog/2025-12-16-coming-soon-simpler-pricing-and-a-better-experience-for-github-actions/
[9] https://www.reddit.com/r/devops/comments/1po8hj5/github_actions_introducing_a_perminute_fee_for/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/devops&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33aUM2Cy_JFJ_fbRejPcWGxAAAAc4&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://github.com/pricing/calculator#actions
[12] https://www.theregister.com/2025/08/11/github_head_ankles_as_microsoft/
[13] https://www.theregister.com/2025/09/05/github_copilot_complaints/
[14] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/02/zig_quits_github_microsoft_ai_obsession/
[15] https://www.theregister.com/2025/06/20/github_begins_enforcing_premium_request/
[16] https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1po9dft/github_self_hosted_action_costs_now/
[17] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Does this really reflect the cost?
Yorick Hunt
Have you never heard the phrase "idiot tax?"
Re: Does this really reflect the cost?
Dan 55
And [1]hammering the CPU while it does it ... but I'm sure that is just a coincidence and won't affect the total time.
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2025/12/02/zig_quits_github_microsoft_ai_obsession/
Simon 66
Good job Github aren't the only players in that game.
Gitlab, Gitea and probably a bunch more offer the same functionality. It's whether moving that part of ones workflow is cheaper than staying put.
Anonymous Coward
When will GitHub users ever learn?
pleased I stuck with Jenkins.
Michael
I have had so many arguments over the years about why I've avoided GitHub actions. I can now say I told you so.
Admittedly most of the time the need to secure images, interact with on prem hardware was also a good reason. I did warn the free service would change to billed one day.
Bloody weasely words
Joe W
We’re postponing the announced billing change for self-hosted GitHub Actions to take time to re-evaluate our approach.”
Yeah... "postponing" it is. It's not "we actually thought about it, and you are right, it was a stupid idea". It is "we'll try that again when you are not looking".
Hmm?
the spectacularly refined chap
What the hell is a runner? It's clearly not Seb Coe; some kind of equivalent to a trigger in a DB?
I neither know nor care about git, I'm still on CVS and staying there thank you, but this article did nothing to put itself into context.
Does this really reflect the cost?
One would assume, a fixed licence fee would be fair. But charging by the minute for running on your own hardware?