I really do not understand why people use GitHub over Gitlab AT ALL.
GitLab consistently brings out AMAZING features at least 1x/month. Their company is ethical (donates regularly to amazing coding groups like BlackGirlsCode, DjangoGirls, PythonLadies, etc.).
Just look for yourself: https://about.gitlab.com/features/
@vickysteeves i think it's just a basic critical mass situation.
there are services that integrate specifically with github.
there's also this "standard" for developers to have work there as a portfolio of code to add to your resume.
@pixelpaperyarn @vickysteeves Yeah, an additional consequence of the critical mass thing is that the total amount of impact on people's lives that developers can have by way of developing with #GitLab in mind is low relative to developing for #Github because the number of GL users is currently low (think: `impact per person * num persons`), and total impact is rewarded/looked at more than `impact per person`. The investment in dev for GL might then be unworthy.
I am not sure I buy this argument. What do you mean by "impact on peoples' lives?"
@vickysteeves @pixelpaperyarn The thinking from here is: If you consider adding support for GL to a service that currently supports GH, the cost associated with implementing that might greater than the benefits you'd get from just developing more stuff for GH users.
@vickysteeves @pixelpaperyarn Ah, so you know, though I suspect that people think the way I suggested, I don't think that it's the way they should think about it. Regarding the impact, I mean the degree to which using something that could be connected to either GL or GH, if not both, and I assume that this would be equal in either case, so the main thing considered would be the total that's produced by multiplying that constant amount by either service's numUsr