zlacker

Well you’re right (especially wrt things like security scanning), but you sort of have to include Azure DevOps in the conversation nowadays. I think the end goal for Microsoft is to get the larger organizations into ADO, either cross-pollinate pipelines and actions or just replace actions with pipelines at some point, and leave GitHub for simpler project structures and public codebases.

That’s why you won’t see a ton of work go into e.g. issues/projects on GitHub. Those features all already exist and are very robust in ADO, so if you need those kinds of things (and the reporting an enterprise would want to be able to run on that data), then you belong on ADO.

>>twodav+(OP)
I can say with a high level of confidence that the goal is definitely not to push larger orgs to ADO over GitHub. ADO is and will continue to be supported and you’re right that its project management features are much more advanced than GitHub, but the mission is not to push people off of ADO and into GitHub.

>>filmgi+Sh
Your opening and closing statements aren’t mutually exclusive, but I can’t tell if one is a typo (or if so, which one it is).

I didn’t mean to imply that MS wanted to migrate anyone, just that the different offerings serve different kinds of customers, so you can’t really just compare GitLab to GitHub and say MS is lacking in serving some group of them.

>>twodav+R33
Yeah I had a typo -- the statement should have been the mission is to push people from ADO to GitHub -- sorry.

The official guidance from Microsoft since probably 2019 has been to encourage all greenfield projects to GitHub, as opposed to ADO.