All the repos are small and most are updated once or twice a year -- but the pricing is the same as if I had a whole team of people pushing to github every day.
Even for a single dev it might be worth it to be able to check out to your normal dev workstation, your laptop, and even on a totally random pc when the need arises. It also allows you to checkup on things through the web when a pc to checkout on isn't available.
Not to say GitHub doesn't make it even more convenient, but the DIY option isn't exactly difficult either.
I set up our repo hosting using Gitosis a few years back and haven't had to think about it since. Accounts are also managed via a special repo so even that is done over git.
You could also put your collection of repositories on your Dropbox and clone from / push to there.
And creating a new git repo just takes 15 seconds:
git init --bare
chown -R username:username reponame.git
The alternative is of course to run your own repo server as you said, which with git can be as simple as just a directory you can access via SSH.
(See http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1964347/mercurial-and-i-g... and http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1960799/using-gitdropbox-... )
Going out on a limb: I'd assume that if you care enough about your data to version it in a git repo, then I'd also assume that you'd not enjoy it exploding because of a sync problem between two computers.
In what implementation of the English language would that contraction make any sort of sense?
It'd be great if you could trade diskspace for # of repositories or something like that.
Full Disclosure: I am writing it, and it is still in beta.
I've been there for years and I couldn't be happier. The only downtime was when AWS went down for everyone.
(disclaimer: I run it)
Less features than GitHub (no file browser, no web interface that shows commits) but hopefully they will address that.
I wonder how many of those accounts have active repos of their own?
We're a small four-people workshop, but our repos are easily several gigabytes in size because of the artworks, source photos and similar stuff. We would probably have squeezed under their limit, but did not want to live under the constant threat of growing out of it.
So, I love GitHub, will continue using it for my public stuff, but I am surprised you can't easily host 10-15 GBs of private code even though you're willing to pay $50 a month for it.
No way. How many programmers are there in the first place? I bet you it's <100M, hell <50M.
EDIT: Back of the envelope by other people put it between <12M to <24M http://stackoverflow.com/questions/453880/how-many-developer...
Under that perspective, one could say that Github has captured the attention of 4-8% of everyone capable of understanding the app.
PS: Personally, I rather prefer the most inclusive version which includes people who simply train their outlook to auto sort their mail etc. In the early days of computing there was little that separated users from programmers and I like to think we are heading back in that direction. If for no other reason than I like the idea of the maximum number of people learning how to work though problems logically.
Unfortunately I couldn't figure out a way to explore user numbers like going to /users/5603 for example. That is actually the route for DELETEing your account, but it doesn't have a GET redirect or anything.
(j/k -- congrats to the Github team, you can pry my account from my cold dead hands)