&gt; Nobody said not to upload to BB or GL. GH is just a more popular option.<p>I don&#x27;t know if you have noticed, but I put an emphasis on the word <i>the</i> of
a phrase &quot;the right way&quot;. If it was &quot;<i>a</i> right way&quot;, I wouldn&#x27;t ever speak up.<p>&gt; You still have to choose one canonical distribution point and I would put money on your own hosting failing both earlier and more often than GH.<p>OK, how would you send me your money? GitHub has experienced three or four
outages in my recent memory, while my hosting remained on-line.<p>And you miss the point completely. It&#x27;s not about nine nines of uptime, it&#x27;s
about having control over communication channels. Primary&#x2F;canonical&#x2F;always
up-to-date one you should host yourself, because you <i>won&#x27;t migrate from it</i>
to elsewhere, barring getting a new domain name.<p>Any third party repository hosting, now with us having git (or any DVCS, for
that matter), may easily be an <i>auxiliary</i> distribution point. It may even
handle most of the traffic, sure, but it&#x27;s a <i>mirror</i>, not the source of
truth.<p>&gt; I think your issue here is rather personal against GH. You could say exactly the same things about uploading to BB.<p>No, it is nowhere near personal. You really think I would react differently if
the article claimed BitBucket be <i>the</i> right way?<p>&gt; And you could say the same about uploading to PyPi rather than own repo, but didn&#x27;t - why?<p>No, you couldn&#x27;t. PyPI as a distribution point is OK-ish, but it rarely is the
only one, and PyPI doesn&#x27;t give you repository hosting, so you still need that
one.