> GitHub's pricing model makes NO sense for established companies with lots of projects
Totally agree with this assessment. When we were with Github, we actually ended up on a custom plan, negotiated with them directly, because we had too many projects to fit within their normal pricing structure. We eventually moved to Bitbucket two or three years ago and it's far more cost-effective for us. At this point we have 500+ projects on Bitbucket, and we're a company of only 20 people.
I use bitbucket for the same reason. As an agency of <20 employees, we have 30 or more clients and many of them have 5-10 projects. Most of them are small projects that we don't touch often, but bitbucket is the only place we can afford to host with that many. We pay for a plan for our own org and we set up free orgs for most of our larger clients since there are rarely more than 4 devs who need access to the projects.
I suspect that the "microservices" craze will soon have reach a "MongoDB moment". Where everyone has gotten burned from jumped in too quickly and blindly, and the pendulum swings back in the opposite direction.
However, right now microservices are blowing up. The new greenfield project that I'm working on right now started out a year ago as a monolith with one repo. It now has microservice components scattered across several DOZEN repos, with dev teams finding excuses to refactor into smaller and smaller granularity each month.
it's not just "microservices" crazyness, if you do devops, you will end-up with bazillion recipes repositories for each dependency, and will may not want to make all of them public.
Totally agree with this assessment. When we were with Github, we actually ended up on a custom plan, negotiated with them directly, because we had too many projects to fit within their normal pricing structure. We eventually moved to Bitbucket two or three years ago and it's far more cost-effective for us. At this point we have 500+ projects on Bitbucket, and we're a company of only 20 people.