I think this can only happen if there are viable alternatives.

For instance, the UI at setups such as https://git.devuan.org/Daemonratte/gtk2-ng is quite ok-ish, in my opinion. Granted, it is mostly copy/paste from github but that still is about 1000000x better than sourceforge's interface - and gitlab's UI too (I just hate gitlab's UI, they seem to love complexity and a billion features only 0.000001% ever need; GitHub, with all its faults, is for the most part really simple - not everywhere, e. g. GitHub wiki setup sucks, but by and large I think it is simple overall).

▲

danudey an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Github definitely has the better UI but if it weren't for network effects I'd be pushing to migrate to Gitlab pretty hard.

▲

Bnjoroge an hour ago | parent [-]

Gitlab’s UI is extremely terrible. It’s hard to even explain how bad it is.

	▲	dilawar 43 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Once you get used to it, it's not so bad which is probably true for all functional UIs. I switch between gitlab and GitHub quite a lot and I can't say which one is objectively better. I do like that cross-linking is easier in GitHub but I prefer gitlab ci over GitHub actions. Too bad that gitlab ci runner has removed the command to run ci locally but third party foss solutions are there.

▲

wongarsu an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If replacing github wholesale isn't viable, how does the story for replacing GitHub Actions look like currently? I don't remember the pre-Github-Actions days of everyone using CircleCI with a github integration in a negative light. I've noticed that since then a couple of CI providers have sprung up that differentiate themselves with faster build speeds, but I haven't really kept up with that market

▲

joshuanapoli an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

I've been thinking of reverting back to Circle CI.