[lloeki]

> their UX is still way behind github. I think they don't have a laser focus on the user and spread themselves thin. There are basic user flows that lack the polish

Using both regularly, the whole create issue 1234-> autocreate branch+MR -> git fetch+checkout 1234<TAB> -> code -> git push -> review -> resolve discussions+open issues for unresolved -> merge+autoclose+autoremove branch -> git fetch --prune flow is downright awesome† and really acted as a catalyst. GitHub just feels so antiquated and cranky compared to that so depending on what you're looking for this frustration can definitely go both ways.

† and it'll be even more awesome when we will soon enable per-branch review deployments which get auto-destroyed on branch removal, followed by auto-deploy of master in staging + manual in production, all neatly tracked in the environments tab.

[mbaha]

I don't think Github are looking to implement the whole CI process.

They want to host code and integrate neatly with other CI providers.

I think that makes much more sense (why abandon Travis or Heroku for the sake of having "one" platform to rule them all... ?)