> we already give Github far too much influence over the free software Yup. I was at GitHub Universe last week. It's very clear GitHub (Microsoft) is trying t

> we already give Github far too much influence over the free software Yup. I was at GitHub Universe last week. It's very clear GitHub (Microsoft) is trying to become like AWS but for the SDLC instead of for runtime. Soon we'll all be using GitHub full-time to do all our coding in the browser with integrated runtime envs and CI and AI along for the ride. You get a taste with some fancy OSS demo projects which they do legitimately support. Then you want to integrate with those OSS libraries, so you have to dip your toes into GitHub's ecosystem. And if you want updates and security and to not have public repos ... then time to pony up. GitHub does support OSS in real ways, but it's pretty obviously a loss-leading marketing / freemium strategy. It's not surprising they give themslves a pat on the back - it's marketing after all. This is not a bad or even amoral thing, but let's not be naive. They're eating their competitors' lunch. Many of the vendors at GitHub Universe had feature-sets that had clear overlap with GitHub's own ambitions, particularly in the security space. GitHub can and will put them out of business when the opportunity strikes. These ambitions are clear. C'est la vie. What's less clear is how developer-friendly the ecosystem will remain when everything is locked into GitHub's world,. And it's even less clear how they will ratchet up pricing (or ratchet down interoperability or industry standards) as more gets sucked in. It is an enterprise B2B company and a part of Microsoft, for better and for worse.