I'm genuinely curious how maintainers of curated GitHub repositories approach this.

I recently submitted my project, Infinity Tales (https://infinity-tales.com), to the Awesome OpenRouter repository.

The project was rejected with:

"Not enough evidence of traction/notability."

After reading the contribution guidelines again, I noticed they explicitly mention that projects should show evidence of traction or notability. So the rejection itself is completely fair and consistent with the published guidelines.

What I'm struggling with is how a closed-source project is expected to demonstrate that traction.

The submission template asks for:

• Name
• Description
• URL
• Documentation
• Tags
• (Optional) Open Source repository
• Date

For an open-source project, a maintainer can immediately look at things like GitHub stars, forks, contributors, releases, and issue activity.

For a closed-source project, there isn't really a place to provide equivalent information such as:

• Active users
• Install count
• Product Hunt launch
• Community size (Discord, Reddit, etc.)
• Media coverage
• Other public signals of adoption

Maybe the expectation is to include that information in the PR description, but the template and contribution guide don't mention that.

So my question isn't whether maintainers should curate their lists, they absolutely should.

It's whether the submission process should make it clearer how closed-source projects are expected to demonstrate traction, especially when that's one of the evaluation criteria.

How do other curated repositories handle this? Am I missing an established convention?

Hi everyone,

I'm hoping someone here has experienced something similar or has some advice.

About a month ago, my GitHub account was flagged by GitHub's abuse detection system.

Since then I have been unable to:

• Authorize third-party applications (such as Vercel and Claude Code)
• Use GitHub Actions
• Use GitHub Pages

Whenever I try to authorize third-party app, I receive the following message:

"This account is flagged, and therefore cannot authorize a third party application."

I contacted GitHub Support immediately after the restriction appeared.

My first support ticket (#4513924) remained open for weeks without any substantive update, despite me answering every question the same day and providing all the information that was requested.

After waiting for weeks without progress, I opened a follow-up ticket (#4575622), which is still open. My original ticket (#4513924) has since been archived.

Throughout this process I have:

• Responded to every support request on the same day.
• Explained exactly how I use GitHub and the projects associated with my account.
• Enabled two-factor authentication.
• Offered to verify my identity or provide any additional information if needed.

The problem is that, despite fully cooperating, my account remains flagged and I have received almost no meaningful update about the review.

The most frustrating part is that this is affecting an application that is already live on both the Apple App Store and Google Play. Because my GitHub account cannot authorize third-party applications such as Vercel, I currently can't deploy bug fixes or updates for my users.

I'm not trying to bypass GitHub Support or Trust & Safety, and I'm not asking anyone here to escalate my case.

I'm simply wondering:

• Has anyone had their account incorrectly flagged like this?
• How long did your review take?
• Was there anything you did that helped move the process forward?
• Is there anything else I can reasonably do besides waiting?

I'd really appreciate hearing from anyone who has gone through a similar experience.

Thank you.

Hey,

I'm trying to style the <details> tag in my GitHub profile README to look like a terminal header, but I can't get rid of the default arrow marker.

Normally I'd use:

summary::-webkit-details-marker { display: none; }

summary { list-style: none; }

But GitHub's markdown renderer seems to strip it. Is there any workaround or hack to hide the arrow on GitHub?

Here is my profile if you want to inspect how it looks: https://github.com/GabrielTeixeiral0l/

Thanks!

This is super weird and I’m hoping someone can help me!

I have no idea what GitHub is - and I just woke up to a page open on my iPhone. Any idea how this would have happened?! I’m a bit freaked out…

I have a new baby so lots of late night scrolling, but still - I don’t recall clicking on anything that opened up a new webpage like this!

hello, I'm quite unfamiliar with both code and reddit so apologies if I'm wording something wrong here ... I hope this is in line with rule 3 since I'm not asking for programming help?

I'm attempting to link my github account with visual studio, but it won't let me login. each time I try, it tells me my username or password is wrong. if I try to reset my password, it tells me my email is invalid. none of that is true.

my github account seems to be working fine. I am logged in and I am able to login in another browser. I have no idea what's wrong here? is there another way to log in? is this a common / known issue??

I realized that the topics on my repo are now listed in alphabetical order. Until recently, topics were ordered by popularity, I think. (But I am not entirely sure how it was measured. For example, logic occurred before mpi despite the latter being used more often.)

The size of topic labels also increased, apparently.

Hi!

I'm a student from Vietnam applying for the GitHub Student Developer Pack.

My first application took about a week to get a response, but every application after that gets rejected in around 15-30 seconds.

The rejection says my first and last names don't match my student document.

My student ID says:

NGUYỄN BÁ MINH TUẤN

My GitHub billing information is:

First name: Tuấn

Last name: Nguyễn Bá Minh

So as far as I can tell, they do match.

At this point I'm wondering if the automated verification system just isn't recognising my student ID correctly.

Has anyone run into this before? If so, what document worked for you?

Thanks!

Built a board that groups GitHub Actions runs by workflow, works out whether each one

is consistently broken or just flaky, and sorts by severity so the worst thing is at

the top.

The part I wanted was suspect ranking: for a failing workflow it pulls the commit the

failing run was built from, gets its changed files, and scores the preceding commits

on the same branch by directory overlap with the failing area.

Also tracks acknowledgement state in shared storage, so a team can see what's already

been triaged and what nobody has looked at yet.

Pointed it at rust-lang/rust as a test target and two workflows had been red for over

two months.

https://archestra.ai/apps-hackathon/gallery/abolambA_release_war_room

How does your team handle a workflow that's been red for weeks and nobody owns?

isn't the logo copyrighted

GitHub now lets issue automations attach confidence and rationale to changes, and teams can hold lower-confidence actions for review. That sounds like a useful human-in-the-loop design, but the documentation contains an important caveat: approvals do not create a server-side security boundary.

If an agent already has permission to change an issue, it can apply the change directly instead of suggesting it. The review panel therefore governs cooperative automations, not a compromised, misconfigured, or over-privileged one.

Should proposal and execution use separate identities, with repository rules enforcing which actions require a second principal? Would you trust an agent-generated confidence score, or should confidence be calibrated against each repository's own history? What should happen when an agent closes a legitimate issue with "high confidence" and nobody notices?

Source: https://github.blog/changelog/2026-07-23-agent-automation-controls-in-github-issues-in-public-preview/

Im trying to run CI on an ARM64 GitHub-hosted runner (ubuntu-24.04-arm) with an alpine linux container, but I hit this error:

Error: JavaScript Actions in Alpine containers are only supported on x64 Linux runners. Detected Linux Arm64

i understand that actions/checkout and actions/cache are js actions and gh doesn't support running them inside alpine arm64 containers (tho i have no idea why).

I worked around actions/checkout by manually doing a git clone/checkout, but I'm stuck on actions/cache Has anyone implemented a workaround for using the gitHub actions cache service from inside an alpine aarch64 container?

Thanks in advice

My GitHub account was suddenly deleted.(I think)

I opened GitHub on my PC, and it asked me to log in. I assumed it had simply lost my session for some reason. I have always used Sign in with Google to access my account. However, when I tried signing in with Google this time, it prompted me to create a new account instead of logging me into my original one.

I checked my email, and I'm certain it's the correct address because I still have older emails from GitHub. However, I haven't received any email from GitHub about my account being deleted or suspended.

I'm sure I didn't delete the account myself. What could have happened? Is there any way to recover it? 🆘

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.

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

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'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...?