Maybe what's going on is they're focusing their resources toward paid offerings for large businesses and away from small and FOSS projects. The most valuable t

Maybe what's going on is they're focusing their resources toward paid offerings for large businesses and away from small and FOSS projects. The most valuable thing Github has is the enormous portfolio of FOSS projects and all the free eyeballs that come with it. Yes, it's not paid, but because its public offerings are so popular, most developers are familiar with it and that gives it a trusted inlet to basically every software organization in existence. After all, in a non-dysfunctional organization, the guy who decides what products to buy to support their developers should give far more weight to what those developers want, than what is said by a vendor salesman whose job it is to convince them to buy a particular product. Which means it's a mistake to neglect their FOSS users -- it seems self-evident that the biggest, best, most cost-effective way for Github to sell its paid features is word-of-mouth from its free users. It's very hard for a competitor to replicate their enormous network effect, which is also what makes it so effective. Their underwhelming response to the "dear github" letter suggests that their upper management is blind to this. I think there's a serious possibility that, in the next five to ten years, their position will be as marginalized as, say, Sourceforge is today -- long ago it was the "gold standard" in hosting services, but today it's only used by barely-maintained projects who can't even scrape together the resources needed to change their code hosting provider.