It always seems a little mysterious when I try to find out more about who mainatains and improves Git itself.
Sure, I can see this gentleman is the named person:
and he has a blog - but not updated for three years:
then we have his GitHub page - but we can't post issues:
then we have tha main Git repo - but again no issues can be posted:
note also that that repo has like 180 pending pull requests going back four years, most of which have stagnated and should be closed I guess, this doesn't encourage participation by others. Then of course we have this:
"The user discussion and development of Git take place on the Git mailing list -- everyone is welcome to post bug reports, feature requests, comments and patches to email@example.com (read Documentation/SubmittingPatches for instructions on patch submission). To subscribe to the list, send an email with just "subscribe git" in the body to firstname.lastname@example.org. The mailing list archives are available at https://public-inbox.org/git/, http://marc.info/?l=gitand other archival sites."
But a "mailing list" is rather antiquated and hardly the best way to handle feedback and feature requests for a technology that has become the backbone source code control system used across the globe.
Isn't it time that Git itself opened up, became easier for developers to supply feedback and engage in conversations about Git technology?
Solved! Solved! Go to Solution.
As you've found out, git is maintained on the git mailing list. Junio is indeed the person shepherding the master and release branches, but there are many other contributors.
Discussions about the git development process do occur from time to time on that mailing list, you're not the only one who thinks that a mailinglist is not the optimal way to develop git. Maybe have a look at the archives to understand both points of view. And if you have somthing new to add to that discussion, the mailinglist is open for everyone to subscribe.