<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000"><div>
I think that the Github move is hazardous. Sure, it is easy, free
for open-source projects, and really really cool. Granted, it
helps a lot in getting fluid contributions to open-source
projects. But ... in two years, they may start shipping sponsors
links at the end of the Readme files, and in a moments notice you
have to watch 20 seconds ads before cloning. At this point, you
will want to bail out, only to find out that in fact you can not,
because you can not delete the project anymore, or the issue
tracker database can not be exported ...<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Apologies for disagreeing, but... This is a misunderstanding of the economics of online businesses. I'm worried that the statements of approval of this claim may skew future choices, and cause more work and hassle and expense.<br><br>The companies that make money by showing advertising are *content providers* such as newspapers, TV networks, Q&A sites,... They have *no other source of revenue*.<br><br>Hosting sites like GitHub make their money from *paid accounts*. They do not need advertising revenue. Just because the "public" face of GitHub is their free accounts does not mean that is the bulk of their activity. It is very common, and popular, for cloud sites to have a free tier. Even production hosting sites do this.<br><br>It is good marketing and helps train folks to use their tools, so that when the time comes to recommend a hosting site or platform for a commercial project, they will naturally gravitate to the site they're already using and like.<br><br></div><div>The idea that GitHub, or Heroku, or OpenShift, or Gitorious, or Bitbucket, or Pythonanywhere, or ShinyApps, or... would at some point go "Hah! You're trapped!" and start demanding payment for free accounts, inserting compulsory advertising, or otherwise attacking their clients is so odd that I have never before heard it expressed as a serious concern in any open-source organization. Given that GitHub is Linus Torvald's project, there may be poison pills in their charter to prevent this even in a hostile takeover. Imagine the reaction if one of these companies did what is being suggested. Their clients would vanish. It's not hard to move from site to site, especially if one is using a DVCS like git. The folks running these companies are not stupid, and most of the companies are associated with open source in some way.<br></div><div><br></div><div>-- Pat<br></div></div></div></div>