[bdhcuidbebe]

> The library name links to a Microsoft repository.

You link to the official audacity and chose to (incorrectly) describe it as ”a Microsoft repository”

Why being dishonest?

[Aachen]

If I say GitHub repository, does the sentence then make sense to you? I tend to forget that GH is Microsoft's similar to how people around here forget WhatsApp is Facebook or random brands are Nestlé, so I try to get in the habit of calling things by the parent brand to decrease the obfuscation

Maybe I should simply have said git, though. Didn't think of that until now at the end of writing this reply. No dishonesty intended, quite the opposite in fact

[bdhcuidbebe]

”a microsoft repository” implies that the audacity project is handled by microsoft, which false.

If you must state ownership you could have done so with something like ”a microsoft-hosted repository”.

Most of us have been around since before microsoft bought github.