> I'd be surprised if none of their employees have contributed to Git.

In git.git, there are 7 commits with @github.com authors, last one from 2014.

(I hope it just means GitHub folks are trying to blend into the crowd by using personal addresses, or something...)

I don't know what addresses they use but github engineering blog has a lot of examples of really useful contributions, e.g.:

> Shortly after our initial deploy, we also started the process of upstreaming the changes to Git so the whole community could benefit from them.

Source: https://githubengineering.com/counting-objects/

But I guess most of their git related work time goes to libgit2.

> I'd be surprised if none of their employees have contributed to Git.

Jeff King (peff) has worked for GitHub for a long time:

https://github.com/git/git/graphs/contributors

Michael Haggerty (mhagger) is also a GitHub employee.

So, yes.

> I didn't interpret anything in the article as saying that GitHub develops Git

"Microsoft [...] wanted to get these modifications accepted upstream and integrated into the standard Git client.

That plan appears to be going well. Yesterday, the company announced that GitHub was adopting its modifications and that the two would be working together to bring suitable clients to macOS and Linux."

This hints that Git upstream = GitHub. I mean, why mention GitHub at all if they aren't upstream? The rest of the article doesn't explain GitHub's role in this story either.

I still don't think your interpretation is warranted, but meh.

Microsoft made some contributions and they're working to get them accepted upstream. They're maintaining a fork basically.

GitHub is adopting their modifications, i.e. GitHub is running Microsoft's fork.

Microsoft's modifications are necessary for them, particularly so they can use Git with the giant Windows repo. Presumably, GitHub also has a need or desire for those same or similar modifications. IIRC, some of GitHub's largest customers need or want a version of Git that can also handle large repos, or repos with large files or large numbers of files.

Maybe quickly changing topics is what causes the confusion. I guess they picked github because it has enterprise offering and enterprise customers are interested in large git repos. So github is like a test lab for GVFS. In the mean time they upstream the changes to real git adjusting GVFS to what git maintainers think is right.

Small comment, it's GVFS, not GFVS,. FileSystem, FS always at the back.