I would oppose it too in the long run, but it would be the easiest low-hanging fruit for getting the ball rolling on including a wider variety of research softw

I would oppose it too in the long run, but it would be the easiest low-hanging fruit for getting the ball rolling on including a wider variety of research software, and I was mostly making a suggestion for next steps in developing their (pretty cool) tool. You have to start somewhere, and if you get GitHub working then it would be (hopefully) much easier to then include BitBucket, GitLab, etc. Indexing self-hosted repos would be pretty tricky, I imagine, if only because you'd then need to maintain a list of all of the servers to clone from. Further, there's also the challenge of including software from all of the research groups who don't even appear to use version control, or if they do it's locked away on a private server or service. How does one attribute authorship rights to those people without source history? Anyways, this is a long ramble now, but I'm mostly trying to illustrate that it's difficult to do what Depsy does with software when it's written in languages without a canonical package repository. That doesn't mean they shouldn't try to expand their reach just because "GitHub isn't enough."