[ConstantineXVI]

A git server (at least on a personal scope) requires close to zero management. Fire up an Ubuntu box on Linode or such, `sudo apt-get install git`, boom, there's your server. A git server is nothing more than "filesystem + SSH + git".

Not to say GitHub doesn't make it even more convenient, but the DIY option isn't exactly difficult either.

[wheels]

Gitosis also takes like all of 5 minutes to set up and then you've got repositories that you can collaborate on and manage permissions between projects.

http://scie.nti.st/2007/11/14/hosting-git-repositories-the-e...

I set up our repo hosting using Gitosis a few years back and haven't had to think about it since. Accounts are also managed via a special repo so even that is done over git.

You could also put your collection of repositories on your Dropbox and clone from / push to there.

[edcrfv]

Gitolite is a better tool, with more options. It's easier to manage who gets access to what as well with gitolite.

[nirvdrum]

I do this now. It works. It just sucks. Rather than have everything in one consolidated location, I have to recall where I put things. It seems like a small thing, and in the grand scheme of things it is, but it's really annoying. And if I'm already going to manage my own server for private repos, then why bother with a paid GitHub account?

[scrrr]

I agree. I have a 40 Euro per month server solely for things like a MediaWiki, backup storage and git repositories. Granted, it takes a little bit of Linux-administration, but that's a useful skill anyway.

And creating a new git repo just takes 15 seconds:

  cd /opt/git
  mkdir reponame.git
  cd reponame.git
  git init --bare
  cd ..
  chown -R username:username reponame.git

That's it. Having said that Github is obviously great (nay, awesome) for larger teams (comment features etc.) and, of course, open-source projects.