Uploads may be going away, but the functionality behind it is being focused in a more usable, elegant way. Case in point: image attachments (the primary use for our uploads section until Friday). Which has all of the legal and support ramifications of the old Uploads section.

For a lot of us, the GitHub page was the project homepage. Now we're going to be forced elsewhere, like BitBucket.

From my own experience and anecdata, software development workflow is not as clear cut as envisaged by github's definition of what constitutes "elegance" or "good solution", but by the constraints faced by the development teams and their internal working framework.

Here's the kicker in your reply, retaining the upload functionality (for images, which can be large in the MB size as well), but removing it just for binaries makes no sense to me.

With that said, I would not be surprised if in the future if they reintroduced it as a "new" feature for their enterprise customers. We'll just have to wait a few years ...

>>> File hosting is not free and providing a downloads tab just encourages developers to use them as a filehost, sometimes as the sole one

IMO, that should not be an issue either. For users (like myself) a binary is the only way to integrate a tool/app into existing workflow to test its efficacy first.

They are plain in the wrong wrong with this move. that's all.

Project wikis are obviously useful in building software. Pages are more for documentation/pitching, but the hosting space for some HTML and images is probably much lower than hosting multiple binaries per project.

and there will be many many.

>> a Github-only solution is inadequate

correct.

>> All I'm asking is for you to be honest, Github.

I read his reply, but no, he did not answer your points, in my view.