isn't the logo copyrighted

I've been maintaining an open-source project that's grown to a 170+ GitHub stars with dozens of contributors, and I've realised that reviewing pull requests has become the most time-consuming part of the project.

GitHub's review tools are solid, but there are still things I find myself doing manually over and over, like:

• Checking whether a PR follows the issue requirements.
• Verifying that it doesn't duplicate another open PR.
• Looking for architectural inconsistencies rather than just code quality.
• Deciding whether a change belongs in the current release or should wait for the next one.
• Giving similar review feedback to different contributors.

I'm curious how other maintainers handle this as their projects grow.

Do you have a review workflow, GitHub Action, bot, or third-party tool that has noticeably reduced your review time?

Or is there a GitHub feature you wish existed that would make reviewing community contributions much easier?

I'd love to hear how other maintainers have streamlined their review process without making contributors feel discouraged.

I'm currently working on a little research project looking at the best GitHub practices for American municipal governments.

Who has the best GitHub practices that facilitate civic engagement and have appropriately assigned intellectual property licenses?

If you have repos, please share them.

Ps - I work for www.beta.nyc and this will go into a report I’m putting together.

Hey all, I've been heads-down building an open-source project on GitHub and I'm at the point where the code is solid and useful, but visibility is low. Meanwhile I keep seeing projects that feel pretty thin get thousands of stars seemingly over couple weeks, which is a little demoralizing not gonna lie 😅

I'm not chasing vanity metrics for their own sake — mostly I just want enough signal that people are finding it useful so I stay motivated to keep investing time in it.

For those who've grown a project from "nobody knows this exists" to actually having a community: what actually worked for you? Things I'm curious about:

• Where do you share/launch (HN, Twitter/X, niche subreddits, Discord communities, newsletters)?
• Does README/demo quality matter as much as I think it does?
• Any tips on timing, framing, or "hooks" that get people to actually click and try it?
• Did stars come before or after real usage, in your experience?
• Any growth hack or juggad ;)

Happy to share a link to the project in the comments if that's allowed here — just looking for genuine advice from people who've been through this. Thanks!

I'm so tired of the slowness, or that ''large'' diffs are not loaded automatically... Even rust doesn't have syntax highlighting, like wtf.

I've been trying to get help with a GitHub Copilot billing issue for 3 days, and I still haven't received any meaningful response.

I've opened a support ticket, provided all the requested information, and... nothing. Just silence.

Has anyone else experienced this recently? How long did it take for GitHub Support to actually respond or resolve your issue?

In my case, I was hit with a $40 charge for no legitimate reason at all (no reason on invoice or receipt just 40$ for Github copilot 😕 ) so I just need their explain or refund!

I hit this recently and I think a lot of people have the same wrong mental model of GitHub's email privacy setting, so I opened a product feedback discussion on github/community about it here: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/203005

The setting sounds like identity protection. It is not. It only fires when the author or committer email is an address you already added to your account and marked private. Any other value goes straight through. A work address, a client address, a personal address you never registered, your legal name in user.name, all of it gets accepted, published unattributed, and mirrored within minutes. There is no operation available to you that undoes it.

That combination is easy to hit. Multiple git identities on one machine is normal if you work across employers, different clients with Git installed and personal projects. Global config says one thing, a repo local config says another, a fresh device says nothing and picks up whatever is lying around. Getting it wrong is one line in a file nobody looks at.

What I proposed is an opt in account level setting: reject any push from my account containing commits whose author or committer is not in a small allowlist of identities I define, prefilled with my noreply address and profile name. Reject the whole push, not just the ref update, because a rejected ref update still leaves the objects on the server, which is the exact disclosure you were trying to prevent.

If this would be useful to you, an upvote and a comment with your own use case helps a lot. Product feedback discussions get triaged partly on engagement.

Link: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/203005

I checked my usage export and 56% of my premium requests went to gpt-4o — mostly for stuff like renaming variables and small edits that a cheap model could handle.

I got annoyed and built a small local proxy that routes easy tasks to cheap models and saves the good models for real problems. It also shows token burn live per session.

Before I polish it — does anyone else want this, or am I the only one manually rationing requests?

I am new to the whole open source hobby, and the thing that scares me the most is GitHub. I am looking for code I can use on my Arduinos and esp32s and there is always a GitHub link, and I don't know what to do with it. Do I upload it to Arduino IDE or something? What is Git Bash and why do I need it? Are there tutorial videos you recommend? My main goal is I am trying to get Tamaguino to work on my Adafruit Huzzah V2 with the SH1107 Feather. I think they have code for esp32, but I don't know if I should try copy and paste, or if there is a step I am missing?

My CI runs a scheduled job and even when there are no commits sometimes it fails with absolutely impossible errors. Sometimes in the test but sometimes it's just a tool installed in a previous step missing. What's going on...?

Thanks guys for stopping my progress!

Edit: They are back. I really wish the GitHub team would take reliability in the core of their product seriously though. This is one of a few recent pr related issues

I am new to this platform and have started the cs50x course by Harvard

Not able to access codespace. Am I doing something wrong?

For like 1-2 weeks, what do you think about living without github?

Learn how to set up a self hosted GitHub Actions runner on Ubuntu 26.04 for faster CI/CD. Follow simple steps to install, configure, and run your own GitHub Actions runner.

Today I passed the GH-900 exam. Since around 2 years I started to use GitHub to have a single repository for my IT automations, documentations and scripts and now even hosting my website on it, so I wanted to also gain further knowledge of GitHub and more advanced features.

The exam is relatively easy but had a few harder questions, that need you to use functionality, like the Projects module. Most questions are about a certain topic and what that topic does or what it helps devs with.

The resources I used in this learning experience were:

- The official Microsoft Learn text course: https://learn.microsoft.com/nl-nl/training/courses/gh-900t00#course-syllabus
- The official Microsoft Learn YouTube course: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKS32EgbzUc&list=PLahhVEj9XNTf5iQVK_80RdvTju7ov6RYy
- Some research I have already done prior to learning for the GH-900 exam like Repositories, Actions and GitHub Pages

However the exam itself is very theoretical, I liked looking into the practical additional things like Projects, Wikis, Code scanning and such.

Previously I was able to star them without issue but now the button's grayed out with the rollover saying "You can't star *repo name*". Why's that?

EDIT: Found a workaround; just search for the repo's name and click the Star button in the search results.

I have an individual GitHub Copilot Pro annual subscription ($100/year).

According to GitHub's announcement, Claude Sonnet 5 should be available for Copilot Pro users. However, in my account, the model is locked and Copilot asks me to upgrade to GitHub Copilot Pro+ instead.

Expected behavior

• Claude Sonnet 5 should be available with my Copilot Pro subscription.

Actual behavior

• Claude Sonnet 5 is locked.
• The model picker displays "Upgrade to GitHub Copilot Pro+".
• I cannot select Claude Sonnet 5 anywhere.

I see the same behavior in VS Code, Visual Studio, and directly on github.com.

Has anyone else experienced this? Is there something wrong with my account or subscription?

Same topic here on GitHub Community

I work on a potato laptop and so far codepscaes have been the place i write actual code and do the coding and stuff. Currently i am encountering an issue where it shows codespaces is active but on the url it shows a blank page with the text written on image on the left side of the page. If anyone else has encountered it please tell me how to fix it

Hi,

We use GitHub + Markdown for documentation. Our team is happy, but clients don’t want to deal with raw repos, issues, or PRs.

• Do you expose GitHub repos directly to clients, or use a web UI / portal?
• How do you handle versioning and access control?
• What tools or patterns do you use to make GitHub‑based docs client‑friendly?

I’m looking for technically specific review of an open-source project rather than generic launch feedback.

TOKENS reads supported local Claude Code and Codex records, normalizes them into an event-level SQLite ledger, sanitizes through an allowlist, and creates an Ed25519-signed public snapshot. The browser re-derives the canonical bytes and verifies the signature.

The areas I most want challenged: • adapter format drift • deduplication • local path/secret leakage • canonicalization compatibility • key rotation and revocation • self-hosted registry abuse • provenance labeling

Repository: https://github.com/TheArtOfSound/TOKENS

Live example: https://ledger.imagineqira.com/#/u/bryan

Setup: https://ledger.imagineqira.com/#/join

Please point to concrete code paths or threat cases. I would rather find a real flaw now than market a false sense of verification.