But they still chose an American company, github, lol ironic

There's nothing ironic, as since the GP said there is no risk associated with GitHub. Git fundamentally prevents vendor lock-in and tampering, and the project is open, so the US have no leverage and pose no threat at all here.

▲

michelsedgh 3 hours ago | parent [-]

its not about leverage or threat, same as the office products, the french owned their docs at the end of the day, i thought it was about sovereignty and using french alternatives?

	▲	Normal_gaussian an hour ago \| parent [-]
		If you have the docs, but not the means to (legally) read and edit them, do you really own them? When MS pulls services you are largely screwed. When GitHub pulls services its a few hours downtime and a new provider.

▲

nolroz 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's the code that's hosted on GitHub, not the documents. Easier to move, easier to negotiate a move. You get visibility and easy distribution until they feel the need to bail.

▲

faust201 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

With that argument we are discussing this on...errr US - the organization that perhaps grew those companies.

The word is not ironic it is pragmatic.