Hi Brian, The arguments for/against GitHub etc. were discussed at length across all of our engineering staff & community, exactly 3 years ago, which reached consensus: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Gerrit_evaluation#GitHub In my opinion, this is not something that should be addressed on a per-team basis (and especially not by making the decision first internally in the team and then announcing it to the wider audience as a done deal). Individual and team-wide preferences should be considered as input to the wider discussion but ultimately people should yield to the collective decision. A per-team decision for critical tooling like the one you just announced would be inappropriate in a corporate setting, and is even more so in a community-facing organization. All this applies to both our Git tooling as well as CI, for which is worth noting that there are people in the foundation working on it full time. It's not very different than our issue tracking tooling either, for which we already know the huge pains that we've suffered in the past by having it fragmented across multiple different tools that each individual team picked. We can always revisit past decisions and reopen past discussions (to some extent, it's a sign of health) but your way is not the way to do this, IMHO. Best, Faidon On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 05:43:07PM -0400, Brian Gerstle wrote: