Talk:GitHub

this Invertocat Logo is more prominently used than the other one in github's website, app etc. Wouldn't it make more sense to replace the current logo with this one? Pritam Shaw🍀 (💬 • 📝) 03:29, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

  Done MaximusEditor (talk) 04:29, 6 December 2023 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• GitHub Invertocat Logo.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:38, 17 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• GitHub HomeScreen.png

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:57, 18 April 2023 (UTC)Reply

I'm only one of the many ex partecipants at GitHub since its first existence days, and I'm not wondering the appearance of Microsoft has changed the entire play. I have been induced as millions others to migrate (escape) from GitHub and it is not a surprise that this mass migration has not even been mentioned in the text of this page. This is only one of the incorrect Microsoft's usual behaviours... omission. But as said: no wonder. Fairchange (talk) 21:14, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

HiFairchange, and welcome to the exodus. There is some criticism and even a paragraph on opportunities for competitors in the article. If you have something to add, bring reliable sources, or use existing ones if any, and add-away! I was also curious why Copilot was not mentioned in context of GitHub. There are sources.[1] -- Yae4 (talk) 21:34, 27 May 2023 (UTC)Reply

If there must be a "criticism" section sourced entirely from a couple articles that describe quotes from Torvalds, then it should also reflect that he had quite high praise of the product overall. However I feel that both his praise and criticism are fairly insubstantive at best - the criticism isn't really about the behavior of the product, but that it doesn't police end-user behavior that he finds annoying. I'd prefer to see this section go away since it's just pet peeves about one guy's preferences around what ultimately amounts to choice of work habits. 99.139.221.82 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 20:47, 31 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

@Thumperward: The "Controversies" section includes a cleanup tag: does this section need to be removed or rewritten? Jarble (talk) 21:32, 4 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

It needs integrated into the article as a whole. For such a long section this is non-trivial, but nonetheless essential in the long run. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 00:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)Reply

I don't think that "AI-powered developer platform" is particularly objective. The company only markets itself as this, but it is actually still a code host.

Also, "AI-powered developer platform" is really vague. ExtremelyUniqueUsername (talk) 18:19, 25 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

I noticed this too, it seems odd to me that "AI-powered" is the first adjective used to describe GitHub... it doesn't really make sense to me and it doesn't look like the article provides where it got this from. Is it actually "AI-powered"? I agree that "AI-powered development platform" is too vague. Wouldn't it be a "source code hosting service"? 76.78.140.68 (talk) 09:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wholeheartedly agree. It's all a bunch of buzzword nonsense which will surely fade out in a few years. It's a code hosting platform where we upload code, no part of that uses AI. Trikkiboy (talk) 02:40, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply

Removed the AI reference. --Polarlys (talk) 22:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)Reply