> how much more difficult it is to create a fork that will be discoverable over the original Part of the problem has been GitHub being unable to even show a fo

> how much more difficult it is to create a fork that will be discoverable over the original Part of the problem has been GitHub being unable to even show a fork graph for highly-forked projects. If that instrumentation was in better shape, one might imagine there would be more convergence. A related challenge is the lack of conventions or infrastructure around describing the intent of a fork. So instead of a transparent single page summary of a repo's forks, their original vision, actual activity, and relationships... individual consumers each do their own exploratory flailing around - "the github dance". In isolated repetition, as there's no convention/mechanism for sharing "I just spent an hour examining all these forks... here's what I learned, to spare you doing the same". Perhaps a minimalist alternative to a codeshelter, might be linking to some persistent discussion forum thread, to bless an coordination process, rather than one particular result. Though which forum has adequate properties... Perhaps use an Issue? Perhaps with some naming convention, like "Relationship to other forks"? "Related Work"? "Forks"? I've felt GitHub started well, was building out needed infrastructure... but then stalled out with much left undone. I'm just not sure codeshelter has the right shape. I've found people being briefly motivated to take something over, and then vanishing, to be a common case. So is "simply transfer ownership" the right model? Sometimes no one person wants to own it, but several would be willing to variously chip in, but the coordination barrier for that is currently unnecessarily high. But maybe someone has already created a "github fork network summarizer" service site, and I've just not yet heard of it? Perhaps the transition from a startup, to a "we're not pathological anymore, really truly" Microsoft, has changed the incentives around supporting parasitic services exploring and addressing niche needs? Could "a better github" information design exercises/services become a thing?