The GNU project did an evaluation of various code repository services, and GitHub has problems other than the server code being proprietary[1]. The problem is

The GNU project did an evaluation of various code repository services, and GitHub has problems other than the server code being proprietary[1]. The problem is that GitHub's client code is also proprietary (namely their site does not function when proprietary JavaScript is blocked), which makes it a user freedom issue. However, their server code being non-free is additionally problematic because it would mean that GNU was recommending the usage of a proprietary service when there are free software alternatives. Which goes against the mission of GNU. > If a software developer doesn't want to pay for GitHub, then what on earth deserves to be paid for. When I use the word "free" I am referring to software freedom, not price. Please re-read my previous comment with that context in mind. [1]: https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.en.html https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.en.htm...