What needs improvement with GitHub?

GitHub could improve in resolving conflicts when multiple developers modify the same line of code. Introducing a feature to manage and resolve conflicts directly within the application rather than on local machines would be beneficial.

The solution is really good. I cannot think of improvement needs.

The query function in GitHub is a bit stiff. They should introduce a query function similar to Jira's JQL for writing complex, nested queries. It’s difficult to write complex queries in GitHub, introducing or, and, and if functionalities.

Regarding improvements, I preferred the tool's earlier pricing model, which limited storage and the number of repositories instead of the number of users, which was more convenient from a customer perspective. I've also experienced issues with GitHub servers being unable to support moving repositories, which caused problems. For basic plans, no support was available to help resolve these issues. I think GitHub should provide more support for smaller businesses to help with these problems.

Speaking of what can be made better in a solution is a difficult topic to discuss because it is not just technology. The tool could improve in the area of artificial intelligence methods. Recently, I made an error when I recently worked on a project since I was confused with some things, and it took quite some work to get it fixed again. Some kind of support in the area of merging should be considered for improvement. At the moment, any improvements in the aforementioned area would be something that I would appreciate as a user. Specifically, I want the solution to offer AI-based merging support, as it is the only area where the product has certain shortcomings.

The solution's cost is high and should be reduced. Our company has a bundle product. Sometimes, people from outside our organization also need to collaborate with our code, and we need to integrate them as well. This causes problems for us because we also need to buy a subscription for them.

The stability can be improved.

The merging features can be improved. The tool has plugins that allow CI/CD integration. It would be helpful if it were available out of the box.

It would be beneficial if GitHub provided some security scanning for new libraries to ensure that there are no viruses in it. The solution’s stability could be a bit better.

We face issues with synchronization while working with teams. It is difficult to synchronize the source code between team members.

The initial setup requires heavy documentation which can be challenging for new developers.

The solution should have less integration with the AI part, but it needs to add features with other automation tools so that it can be easily integrated.

The product must document the CI/CD process more. It must also expose the APIs for CI/CD.

GitHub needs to improve its UI.

There is room for improvement in terms of interface because I had a problem with developers who didn't know what GitHub was, and it was a little bit strange to explain.

I don't have any comments on the improvement needed in the tool since I'm okay with it. I don't have anything really in mind. It's not like I am picky, and I don't need to be picky unless it's really an overblown, like, there are some bugs or some glitches or something like that in the solution. As of now, everything looks fine. Scalability is an area with a shortcoming, because of which it has room for improvement.

The solution can improve by adding video guides, official guides, or short courses that cater to beginners who are new to the system. These resources could offer step-by-step guidance on how to use GitHub, including common procedures such as pulling and committing. Currently, many of us have to resort to searching for information on how to do these tasks via Google. An official guide provided by GitHub itself would be a valuable asset to newcomers and would save them time and effort. There is potential for GitHub to enhance its features to be more like a Jenkins pipeline or CI/CD pipeline. While I currently use GitHub for code integration, I would like to see more emphasis placed on code management and automation. It would be beneficial to have more input on these areas within GitHub.

GitHub could add some more security features.

There can be conflict issues when two developers work on the same file or line of code, and it would be great to see that improved, possibly with an AI solution. A great feature would be the AI for code conflicts, enabling us to choose which code edit is the one we want to go with.

I would like to see more security where a plugin was available for us to update in relation to security.

We would like this solution to have a more user-friendly interface.

There is a bit of a learning curve. The very first them that I used it, my issue was understanding it. It seemed very complex to me. That said, eventually, I got the hang of it. They could make it a bit more user-friendly.

There are some minor areas of improvement that could be made, specifically the onboarding processing which I think could be simplified. It would be great if GitHub could integrate with AI and machine learning systems.

I cannot recall coming across any shortcomings of the product.

I would like a more graphical, user-friendly UI, to avoid writing so much code on cmd.

From the recruiting standpoint, I would like to see email IDs and phone numbers and a brief introduction about their profile.

GitHub could have better integration or capability with other solutions.

GitHub storage is one of the main requirements and it could improve.

The GitHub repository needs an upgraded user interface and overall UI improvements. In Automation Anywhere, we have one repository where you can download or upload information. They have two interfaces in a single view that has verification. It would be good if Github offered the same.

Mostly they have the features that we need and they are currently being used. There are two approvals already. However, if something has to be moved into approvals, and if they don't approve it in a few hours, then they should move the approval request to some other user, or they should have a way to escalate it.

GitHub uses basic configuration, but messaging is not clear. For example, when a database denies a username and password, it says "asking for person accepted". I would like to see improvements with merging code from multiple branches. When more than one developer is working at the same time, it becomes complicated. It very much depends on the person doing the merging. There is no assistance from the tool itself. If a mistake is made, the tool will not be able to correct it. It would benefit from an automated checker.

They need to make it possible to recover branches. For any of the branch that does not have PR, that is unrecovered. So there should be an option to recover those branches. I cannot recall coming across any missing features. The user interface on GitLab is better.

We are not able to access GitHub from our VPN. Whereas on the customer side, we are able to access the open source data. If the data was more accessible in my company as well, I think it would be useful to have the ability to work with VPN. I would also like to see deeper integration with Microsoft products.

GitHub's issue management could be improved a little from an organization standpoint. It would be helpful to have the ability to organize a work board or a backlog more comprehensively. For organizations migrating to GitHub from arbitrary systems, it's a little bit of a headache to move on to that system.

It is not technical. It is more about how people perceive GitHub in terms of the security of the code. They need to understand that if they have a repo on GitHub, it is not public for everyone. They're improving the work items to track the progress of the team, but in my experience, Azure DevOps is better in this functionality. GitHub needs to improve the form to track the progress of the work done by a team.

The only thing I see missing in GitHub is that it isn't very user friendly for key personnel who don't have in-depth, technical knowledge. In Jira, there are many functions to upload our test cases, and in GitHub we can only do it manually. There are functions which can be used to upload different files, but that still requires some technical knowledge. A layman cannot do it. Someone has to be trained with all those artifacts. In the next release, I would like to see more QA friendly features like extensions. In Jira, you can modify different extensions. GitHub doesn't have that. They have many standard features, but sometimes I feel that there is something that I need but it's missing.

I'd like to GitHub become a more user friendly solution. There are some commands that if we want to reset it to a previous version or we try to roll back, we sometimes get a broken link in the history. Maybe there's something we can do to make the learning curve easier for the user. Perhaps by visualizing the operation instead of the command line.

The branches created for the separate software and enrollment should be improved. There is a need to create separate software branches, such as for the production, operation and development teams, who are licensed, in respect of their need to match to test what they develop in a test environment. I can immediately go back and look at the features to see if they are up to the mark, such as those involving unnecessary code. As someone who works in infrastructure, I know how hard it can be to create things on this level, but it can be worthwhile. Confirmations and requisite future updates are in the end user's domain. The migration of the databases, such as the migration of my websites to the new WordPress sites, works at times but is slow. In such a case, the hardware must be increased. When it comes to the question of whether we should change to new servers and set up a new infrastructure level, I have found GitHub to be very helpful. It pushes the code directly to the repository and dumps the database on the other end. The security point should be addressed in the next release. Scaling is also an issue. If the code is very high on the user side and I should suddenly find myself wanting to increase the monthly use of my website from 10,000 to 30,000 people, it can create an imbalance in the infrastructure. In the case of the code level, we may see issues involving optimization.

It is currently only from the development perspective. It doesn't have features related to project management and testing. It is not like Azure DevOps. So, there is a lot of room for improvement. It is a version control product, and it would be good if they can come up with a complete DevOps product.

There is a bit of a learning curve. At first, you'll have to do some searching online to figure out how to perform or reverse certain actions. When we have new team members, they tend to send you a full request for issues and it can create a bit of a bottleneck. There can be a lot of research and lots of problems initially created by users that don't yet understand the system. The solution could use even more integration with automation tools.

If it had all of the end-to-end integration, then we probably wouldn't have any doubts about what we have installed. However, at this point, we're still trying to figure out how to use it end-to-end. The new version is supposed to make GitHub actions available to us within the on-prem instance. We're waiting for that, just to see how that plays out with the rest of the source control features and to see if that gives us some semblance of similar capability to what GitLab supposedly provides. I don't know if there are any plans to do a better integration with the front-end type of tooling. I would like to see it evolve to a full-blown DevOps stacks hopefully similar to GitLab at some point. We've found the way licensing is set up to be very challenging. Also, the LDAP sync capability falls over frequently due to the complexity of our LDAP domains. This requires us to perform manual LDAP syncs almost on a daily basis

In terms of what could be improved, I would say the security. I didn't try the two-factor authentication so I don't know if they have it already or not. I sometimes found it very difficult to connect it with other tools, such as Jenkins or others. For the testing for example, I have to go between both sides. I don't know if I am using it right, but I don't know if they have these features or not. So I have to find other tools to support it because I couldn't really rely on GitHub for the steps that I needed. Additionally, we are facing really big issues with the Arabic language in GitHub and I don't know if they are focusing on some improvement in the language capabilities. This is one of the things we're facing. As I mentioned, for the management we need some improvement in GitHub. It's not built for that. We really need some improvement for the project. It made it tough. But overall I didn't find anything really urgent needed to improve.

I would like to see integration with Slack such that all of the changes made in GitHub are reflected there. You would simply enter the Slack URL and the notifications about code changes would be forwarded.

If you are uploading or cloning a large file, with more than 25 megs, it's pretty slow. The upload/download speed is pretty slow for a single large file. It is only a problem if the repo has a high-resolution pic or video.

The ticketing system is not working. This solution would be improved with the inclusion of support for CICD.