This is the question. Or, better, to github or not to github.
Once upon a time, github was a bad hosting site, because the site code is not free, and we should have rather preferred gitorious. I did. But then gitorious closed shop and I had to go to the various projects (hosted elsewhere) that had submodules and make a commit to change the link. Not many projects, I admit, but still an unpleasant operation. Besides, all past history is now broken because of the dangling submodule link. I'm able to bisect anyways, but will my user be able too? And this problem is replicated for all repo owners. Not nice.
So, besides self-hosting (unfeasible for whole-kernel repos) I moved to github. Well, not using it other than as a git repo why should I care that the code (that I do not use) is not free? Maybe because I contribute visibility to that specific unfree provider, but they were "friendly" guys.
Now, they are microsoft. Same people. Same site. Different owner, different money-flow. Shall I (we) change attitude? Most smart people say no, that nothing changed. I'm aware the new owner is not worse than most other companies -- but they are the same ones who wanted to kill us out of the market, before turning into friends who still would love if we disappeared.
So, I feel a little uneasy, and I'm now wondering where to push my yet-unpushed projects (while keeping previous stuff on github for several reasons -- mostly link-rusting issues).
How does the free software community feels in this respect?
thanks /alessandro