The real win this architecture has is outsourcing its content management database to GitHub. That's where all the complicated stuff like permissions and authent

The real win this architecture has is outsourcing its content management database to GitHub. That's where all the complicated stuff like permissions and authentication and change notifications and approval workflows, that make up the bulk of complexity in most bespoke business applications, as well as all the tricky stuff of managing the actual files that the contributors are managing, is all happening. It's a smart decision! There's a lot involved in running a system like that reliably - outsourcing it is a great idea. If they were to do that in house, by switching to a self-hosted GitLab, say, well... that could be run on a single machine (https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/administration/reference_architectures/1k_users.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/administration/reference_architec...) at the cost of having to manage scheduled downtime for upgrades. If the user base or activity level grew beyond what that server could handle (and given that the intention of this project is to cultivate an ever growing community of contributors that might be a concern)... the next stop up is an eight node system: https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/administration/reference_architectures/2k_users.html https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/administration/reference_architec....