to git or not to git

[Alessandro Rubini]

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