Mine was convinced that cell phones and landlines were two different networks. Like you couldn’t call a landline from a cell and vice versa. This went on for decades, even after we infront of her proved it worked.

Having a single centralized source will always give those issues. It can go down either temporarily or permanently. It is all part of the conveniance/single-point-of-failure scale.

In the short run it going down will cause some issues, which can be mitigated by having local mirrors of critical repos. However, moving to another place should in theory be as easy as replacing github.com with gitlab, codeberg, your-local-git-server url, etc (and auth info of course)

Actually testing what will happen if github and/or other services are down and see how your product or build pipeline handles it, is a very good thing to do, but very rarely is it done. It can be easily accomplished by for example adding a drop rule in iptables. Testing for bad things never seems to happen though, and then when it really is a problem nothing works and everyone panics.

I dont like having 90%ish of all git repos all in one handbasket. Even if MS was benevolent, its not good to have all things in one place. A bad actor could take down all of GH and we would be screwed.

That is not how git works though. If github disappeared today it would be a lot of confusion, but the code exists everywhere it is checked out. The owner/maintainer (or anyone really) can just add a new remote and push it. If they use github specific features like issues, they would be lost though.

Baptism is such a weird thing.

I think Haskell is such a weird thing