Hi Paul, thanks for the reply! I wasn't judging you guys on the 'pictures' at all. :) Was just giving some candid feedback from my experience. I actually signe

Hi Paul, thanks for the reply! I wasn't judging you guys on the 'pictures' at all. :) Was just giving some candid feedback from my experience. I actually signed up write after I wrote that, and was going to post again once I'd had a chance to try it. I did get to try it briefly and I actually think the UI, while simple, is better than the other (albeit much more complex) solutions I've been looking at. >FYI: we hate the "write to my private repos" thing too, but with GitHub's permissions model there isn't a better alternative (there are alternatives, they're all bad). IMO, this would be a big improvement and is doable: let me sign up (still via GitHub auth) without asking for the repo or user scopes. Then have a call-to-action that upgrades the token, as part of the guided welcome into Manage Repos. [I realize this could hurt your funnel, perhaps offer this path buried in the FAQ somewhere if that's a concern] If you pass nothing for the scope param to the GitHub API, that gives you the authentication piece with read-only access to the user's public stuff. Then just add a "Hey, we can only see your public repos by default - click here [..]" that sends them into the web flow again with the additional scopes, to upgrade your auth token. Also, while I'm giving unsolicited advice :) - it may be obvious, but letting the user know that when they follow a repo (and just doing this on the first repo they use would be fine) that you're going to add an SSH key would probably be a good addition. Since adding a deploy key sends an email to all admins of the organization, some users might want to give people a heads-up they're trying out Circle. . . . Anyway, Circle looks great already and I'm eager to see what other stuff you guys have in store. I'll certainly be using it for some of my projects.