Overlap between GitHub Issues and Discussions gets messy fast unless each has a clear job.

A workable split:

Issues: reproducible bugs, actionable feature requests, and concrete tasks that need tracking to completion.

Discussions: open-ended questions, design proposals, usage help, and ideas that need community input before they're actionable.

Pull requests: proposed changes reviewed against a specific goal.

The tricky part is promotion. A discussion can grow into a feature with clear scope and acceptance criteria, and at that point it needs an issue to track the work.

Issue templates help too, especially for bug reports. But mandatory fields can scare people away from reporting real problems. For a small project, I'd keep templates minimal and write one clear paragraph explaining when to use Discussions.

The maintainer still has to set the workflow, even with both features available.

Question for you: do you keep the Issues/Discussions line strict, or let maintainers decide case by case?

I have a project a couple of thousand of stars and 37 forks until recently. I haven't announced a new version for over 6 months and have never promoted it during that time.

Stars trickled in at a usual way, a couple of stars every week. Now up until 4 days ago i had 37 forks, hardly anyone forks my project because its a bit difficult to contribute without domain knowledge. Most fork to either add a small tweak or to package the project for their distro or fork and open a pr to contribute something. (but for contributions obviously more people just clone the thing). It was very rare to fork it.

Now 4 days ago i got 2 forks in a row 2 days ago another fork, today another fork.

The first 2 happened at the same time like 30 minutes apart. They are brand new accounts with 2 profile pics, i noticed they had like 1-2 stars in total and and they starred the same projects exactly

And now every 2 days some random people who just created their brand new account are doing the exact same thing they have like 5 repo's all forked at the same day of their account creation and no other activity

---

Is this some type of star farming which fork random repo's which they get from awesome lists to appear like a more genuine account so they can boost the stars of certain other repos?

edit : holy after 2 minutes of typing this i just checked my github and there was another fork 1 hour ago

I need to host a static site to show a couple links to some free applications I created, but also include a section with my educational products, some of which are free while some are paid products. The site is static, so the product pages will show information on a specific product (including prices) and a link to either buy from a third party site (like udemy) or a contact form and WhatsApp link so the person may choose to get a payment link to buy the product or ask questions about it.

This means my site won't process any payments or buyer data but instead link to the specific place where the purchase can be made.

Let me add that I want to use my own base domain, so I need to be able to redirect my domain to the site. Cloudflare pages doesn't allow base domain redirection unless I use Cloudflare's nameservers (which is a limitation for me). Vercel doesn't seem to allow commercial sites, and Netlify seems to have quite low usage limits. That's why Github Pages would be a great choice, only if I'm sure it won't break terms and conditions.

The terms for Pages (https://docs.github.com/en/site-policy/github-terms/github-terms-for-additional-products-and-features#pages) say:

GitHub Pages is not intended for or allowed to be used as a free web hosting service to run your online business, e-commerce site, or any other website that is primarily directed at either facilitating commercial transactions or providing commercial software as a service (SaaS). Some monetization efforts are permitted on Pages, such as donation buttons and crowdfunding links.

So would my site break these terms or is it ok to host it on Github Pages?

It's pathetic microsoft as soon as bought github started gatekeeping and paywalling features...

What's the reason for hiding stars on mobile view? Its nothing to do with bots or ai if u can still see it on pc, it's just control.

I often browse on my phone some shared repositories and check star count first to identify projects is legit or how much traction it has. Sometimes looking at fake repo saved me minutes of browsing it if it's dead.

Is there a workaround, some other domain prefix u can add that exposes star count for the repo, or any quick workarounds I can use on my phone?