The main lesson I took from the SF->GH transition was to never, ever put my marbles in a bag owned by someone else again. I'm happy that GH is there to act as a totally public repo-website, and will happily auto-mirror to it, but I'll always self-host when it comes to the canonical repository for any project I'm nominally in charge of.
If GitHub just would support CNAMEs--like being able to tell it "git.saurik.com" is the canonical host for "github.com/saurik"--this would be a lot more reasonable :(. We even live in a future where it would be trivial for them to have this work with SSL (which wasn't the case yet when I started calling for CNAME support back when GitHub first came out).
Wouldn't this then make it trivial for you to spin up a separate host, do some git wizardry to clone everything from your local copy to that separate host, edit the CNAME, and redirect away from the Microsoft-provided hosting with no issues?
…
I mean, yes that's literally the idea, but you do see why it's not happening?
Yes. I 100% understand why GitHub (and now Microsoft, as well as every other platform) is incentivized to be evil. FWIW, I'd even pay for the CNAME support, as they are then a hosting company, but I also understand why they make more money in aggregate off of all of the locked-in users than they would from the random people who would pay for it to not be evil. I will say: my conclusion is that no one should ever be using GitHub.
