The new collaborator feature makes it easier to include stakeholders in the communication loop.

The feature I really think github is lacking right now is the ability to give selective permission to some sections of the repo (issue|wiki|code|releases). Right now the only way to share issues but not the code is to create a separate repository, which is cumbersome to do and maintain for every project.

I can't overstate how useful it would be to at least restrict write access to certain branches. Bitbucket has had it for a while now [1], so I'm surprised GitHub haven't followed suit.

[1]: https://blog.bitbucket.org/2013/09/16/take-control-with-bran...

I don't know if I would use branch restriction, it sounds like an anti pattern for the git philosophy (SVN file locks, anyone?). Why would I commit to someone else's branch, unintentionally? I think that a "gentlemen’s agreement" as your link states, is more than enough. Can you provide a use case where this feature is useful? Do you use it often in your workflow?

I can see it being used for autodeployments on a "stable" branch and no deployments on other develop branches, and the stable branch being write-restricted.

Agree, seems like the most common use case, that is why we implemented them in GitLab, for more reasons see https://about.gitlab.com/2014/11/26/keeping-your-code-protec...

Yes, being able to give permissions to triage issues without giving repository write access is a pretty big deal for open source projects.

I'm very, very excited about this. The poor level of control over permissions in orgs were a big issue when we (LXQt) moved our development to Github. Look forward to trying it out.

Edit: Here are in-depth docs on the new features: https://help.github.com/articles/improved-organization-permi...