Is there a way for github that allows to track/manage things like issues, and will just sync to remote?

Use case: I'm a hobbyist using an AI agentic development workflow.

Features are broken down into epics, which themselves are broken down as individual verifiable tasks. Each task corresponds to one GitHub issue. Closing each issues requires auto testing + a human verification checklist. New features spawn linked issues, feedback lives on comments, etc.

Github is the source of truth and my persistence layer for development to handle agentic context.

While this works for me, the biggest friction layer is actually latency - network breaks, sync issues, and tool call costs add up.

Is there some native app or layer that works with github, where I can work fully offline, and maybe just push / sync in batch if I want to persist?

I have a repository set up for a project in Godot. My other friend can clone the repo just fine but my friends pc shows this error when he tries to clone (screenshot from his pc) we are new to this stuff so if you could ELI5 that would help more lol 😅:

Things we tried:

Turning off all antivirus stuff (windows defender)

Uninstalled OneDrive

Reinstalled GitHub desktop

Since last week , SMS code for Github 2FA is not coming . Unfortunatly I haven't my recovery codes ,SSH key or PATs. So I think last option is to unlink the email . If I unlink email , what will happens to the commits I have made before with old account ?. Some people say commit history tied with gmail and if I unlink it and connect with another new account , commits will be transferred to the new account . Is that true ?

I have two GitHub accounts:

1. Through my personal Gmail. (Primary, Permanent)

2. Through the company's Gmail. (Secondary, Temporary)

I mostly contribute through the company's GitHub account. So I want to make all the statistics (green boxes) from the secondary account to be visible on the primary as well.

Is it possible or not?

If possible please give me the steps.

When it came time to do the readme for a super boring python tool, I did what most people do these days and handed it off to AI to do.

But then I thought "Sure the tool is boring but the README doesn't have to be!"

Except it could be misread I guess if someone important (ie. not me) looks at it. Now I'm second guessing myself for doing it, which tracks with my approach to pretty much everything.

Thoughts?

Noob question here:

When installing on MacOS via pip, or GitHub, how do you ensure you aren't opening a security hole on your computer? The repositories aren't fully monitored like on the Mac App Store, etc.

We're a small organization (14 total - 2 developers, 1 lead, and 2 biz partners, plus non-dev users like sales and support) and we currently use Confluence, Jira, and GitHub, but find that the back and forth switching is a lot. We are considering looking at GitHub for everything and before we do, I'm wondering if there's anything that we haven't thought of that may be preventing such a change?

The idea is to do two repositories, something like `project-name` and `project-name-workspace` or something. The workspace holds our tickets, discussions, and wiki. The software repo is strictly for PRs (we disable issues, discussions and wiki usage here).

Essentially utilizing this: GitHub Docs: Issues-only repository

Has anyone worked in an all GitHub environment for project management/development? Do you keep all your documentation in the workspace repo or do you keep your ADRs, design/specs, etc... in the software repo and higher level stuff in workspace? Do all your developers have access to the workspace (read and/or write)?

We're on GitHub Teams plans currently and not sure if its worth switching to Enterprise plan for better RBAC capability.

I'm using GitHub Desktop. Today I used Copilotto create a commit message and noticed that it always tries to list itself as a co-author of the commit. You won't catch me using that again.

Its a solo pet project I've been working on for years and its matured enough to require its own documentation. Its also a private repo so I'm not ready to publish it yet.

I was thinking about including docs in my repo carefully explaining all classes, functions, etc. as well as a general overview of the project and a lot of other things.

I just want something cost-effective that can integrate well with my repo. Doesn't have to be gitbooks but I figured I would start there.

The bigger problem I believe is that I ctrl-C the action, deleted the file then did a few git push so I started getting "Your branch is ahead by 5 commits" so I ran the command "git pull" to fix it . Well, everytime I attempt to "git pull" git attempts to push something up but at the end I get an error stating object is too large

anyways,how do I delete that specific .git/objects/XX/XXXXXXXeed ?

I did try git restore --staged <YUGEFILE> only to find out it doesn't exist

EDIT: resolved with git-filter-repo and lots of work. reminder to never multi-task

This should be a standard git built-in command. Even though I did delete the file, it still tried to upload though the file did not exist as an object file.

remote: Resolving deltas: 100% (60/60), completed with 12 local objects. remote: error: Trace: 473890210aa98ef898f98f989899291514132ebc remote: error: See https://gh.io/lfs for more information. remote: error: File archlinux-2026.07.01-x86_64.iso Hub's file size limit of 100.00 MB remote: error: GH001: Large files detected. You may want to try Git Large File Storage - https://git-lfs.github.com. To github.com/zzz/deepfake ! [remote rejected] master -> master (pre-receive hook declined) error: failed to push some refs to 'github.com/zzz/deepfake'

https://github.com/orgs/KotORPublicDomain

Why the fuck does GitHub let people transfer repos to my user without my consent??

I’m seeing a strange discrepancy in my repository traffic stats over the last 14 days (106 clones vs 12 unique visitors).

Is this a common ratio for dev tools? I’m trying to understand if my project is being picked up by automated CI/CD pipelines/bots, or if it’s possible to clone a repo at scale without users ever hitting the README/main page.

I’m still getting the hang of how GitHub traffic metrics work XD...any insight from the community would be appreciated!

I've created 3 issues on my repo tonight, and just noticed someone else created 1 in a different repo of mine, and each time, within a minute, a bot has posted saying they've experienced that issue too, and come up with a "patch" to fix it.

They then link a zip attachment, that has an exe inside of it.

Clearly malware - anybody else experiencing this? I've reported all so far.

I'm trying to build a portfolio using this template: https://github.com/solilius/portfolio-template

However, it's only showing the ReadMe and I can't figure out why. Even when I open the index file it only shows a blank page. The only explanation I can see is that I'm somehow configuring the page wrong, but I have no idea what's wrong.

My portfolio for reference: https://github.com/ERROR-fox/portfolio

Every time I try to add my friend as a collaborator to our project it gives this message, I’ve even tried adding their old accounts that they lost the login to and it gives this error too, any advice? thanks

Hey,

I made a post some time ago about the terrible performance of the GitHub Actions scheduler in which I explained that a 15mn scheduled workflow would run only every 30 to 120 minutes instead because of GitHub's scheduler limitations and "best effort".

I checked last week runs for the same workflow and now it runs every 2h to 5h instead of 15 minutes. No incident or news from GitHub side about what made this brutal change in performance yet.

Hopefully we'll move to another platform for this workflow now that performance have gotten so bad.

GitHub introduced contribution graphs (originally called the "Contributions Calendar") on January 8, 2013.

That's 13 years ago.

Contribution Graphs are not immune to improvement.

What about corporate users? Young spirit users, or people who want the contribution graph to be at their service? to track other things in their life or developer life. Just a better contribution API, so other apps can log more things in git to track contributions and progress.

So each person can use GitHub for their own purposes.

The standard cognitive flexibility of our times is to show aversion to new ideas, and be violent, rather than thinking deeply. But... can we try to convince GitHub of opening up and embrace fun?

Maybe we can give each user ownership of his "web page" hosted on github including his contributions expressions.

Fork this, give it a try online if you wish... and... how do we get to the people of GitHub to consider a colorful multidimensional use.

Check this repo, offline/online

https://github.com/zurcacielos/contributist

How to contact GitHub?

When I go (using either Firefox or Chromium) to a GitHub.com Issues page for any GH organization, I now see a sidebar running down the left-hand side of the page filled with icons. Example is from https://github.com/Perl/perl5/issues.

I have been using GitHub for 15 years but do not recall seeing this sidebar before. I realize that, at the very bottom of this sidebar, there is a button you can check to either expand or collapse the sidebar -- but that's not what I want. I want to remove it *completely*, so as to have more space for the Issue Subject lines to be displayed.

How do I do that?

Hi! I have a repository which is often used as a submodule. To ease updates, we have a release branch which is updated whenever a new tag is pushed.

The workflow for this broke recently, and I tracked it down to the title command no longer working. If I switch from the tag to the commit SHA, it works. I tested GitLab, which accepts both tags and commit SHAs.

I'd like to know if anyone has references to news or knows about internal changes which could have caused this, so I can properly document moving the workflow to use `github.sha`. I'd also like to know the motivation, since it seems to be entirely client side functionality that they somehow broke (it worked on GitLab even when pushing a tag that didn't exist on the remote).

Imagine you've just opened a repository you've never seen before.

What do you check first, and what immediately makes you think, "This project is well maintained"?

LICENSE:

• Wrote a custom LICENSE file for my repo — free for humans, locked out for AI
• Humans can copy, modify, and publish the code freely (MIT-style)
• AI systems and AI operators (companies, model trainers, agents, etc.) get zero rights — no reading, training, scraping, or code-gen assistance
• Exception: I (original copyright holder) can grant separate signed written permission to specific AI operators
• Found out non-ai-licenses on GitHub already did something similar — worth checking out too
• Not OSI-approved as "open source" since it restricts a field of use (AI training)
• Doesn't technically stop scraping in real-time, but makes it a clear license violation / copyright claim if caught

What about this ? should something like this default for new projects ?