GitHub Community
Support repository categories #4174
Replies: 119 comments 85 replies
|
Perhaps more fitting to the GitHub style of organizing non-hierarchical data: labels? |
|
I'm ideally looking for a way to categorize my repositories, without resorting to something like creating an organization. I feel like your labels approach almost fits into what topics do - labels could only show results for a specific user, but it's not much of what I had in mind. |
|
hmm 🤔 |
|
Yes, please. What makes the flat list of repositories extra weird is the possibility to create a rich hierarchy of teams, assign complex roles and permissions to these teams in various repositories, and then still have repositories presented as a flat list without any connection to the teams that have ownership over them. If only repositories could be "owned" by different teams and then presented in the same hierarchical order as the teams they are owned by, that would solve this whole debacle for me. |
|
I agree: I'm currently using GitLab and its possibility to organize repositories is one of its best features. |
|
Yes, it would be a great improvement of the repos organization if it would be possible to add purpose dependant repos into ad-hoc folders, like in GitLab. GitLab Subgroups |
|
I agree with this idea. |
|
This would be a nice addition to GitHub. |
|
It would be a great improvement of the repos organization if it would be possible to add purpose dependant repos into ad-hoc folders, like in GitLab. GitLab Subgroups |
|
we're considering moving to github from bitbucket but this is major reason we are getting pushback. gitlab, bitbucket both support this. please consider adding. |
|
Most devs at my company regret us moving away from Bitbucket to GH. |
|
I really need this feature, being able to organize projects by "subgroups" or folders, it's essential. GitLab and Bitbucket have had this functionality for a long time. |
|
This would be extremely useful, even if it's just 1 level of nesting. I'm surprised this isn't a bigger topic since GitLab has had it for years. READMEs or permission inheritance would be a cherry on top. |
|
I'm surprised too. This is a huge limitation... |
|
Not gona lie. Just grouping without any additional functionality would be enought |
what kind of additional functionality are you looking for? |
This was in response to the "root" comment, who mentioned
|
|
Is this something that could be done with a 3rd party plugin, or github app, or something similar? Because this issue has been around for a long time, and basically ignored. It seems pretty unlikely it's ever going to be implemented. |
|
Should I close this in favor of that issue? It's a heck of a lot older and has a ton of responses on it. |
|
In my opinion, I don't think so, if the discussion remains open, it will ensure that the matter does not fall into oblivion 😅 |
|
Also, this repository is the official feedback forum |
|
No - the more issues the better. Maybe something will happen. |
I didn't even realize that was posted in a different repository, guess I just overlooked it :p. That's enough incentive for me to keep the issue open. |
|
ok, so how do I upvote it? |
|
Same! |
|
If you look @ the original post of this request (#4174 (comment)), you'll see ↑ on its bottom extreme left. That's the upvote. Click & make sure it's highlighted (like when you react, typically 👍, to a post). Congrats, you've upvoted. |
|
I work at a large company with thousands of repositories and not having a good time here. My group alone has over 450 repos and it's basically becoming unmanageable. We migrated from Bitbucket two years ago and miss this feature every. single. day. |
|
Completely true, I feel the same 😅 |
|
Please! This is sorely needed in our organization. |
|
Sorry to disappoint you but... We are at 7 years waiting (looking back at the original thread) so you better consider gitlab |
|
Not sure how this feature is still missing where on the other hand nearly all competitors like BitBucket / GitLab etc. have it. |
|
Same :,) |
|
+1 |
|
At 100+ participants by now can we get at least some official reaction from GitHub, please? |
|
+1 This shouldn’t be forgotten it’s unacceptable that this feature still isn’t available at this point. |
|
Agreed, I continue to use Gitlab and Bitbucket because they provide this basic critical feature. Our company has been considering switching because of the Co-Pilot features, but the lack of the feature to group repos into projects makes the switch a non-starter. I wonder if the GitHub executives realize just how much lost revenue they have because they have not priorities this feature. |
|
+1 |
|
+1 |
|
Still nothing? Jesus, it's 2026 |
|
it is a show-stopper! |
|
It seems that this topic is being completely ignored, perhaps even silenced. |
|
+1 |
|
GitHub should listen to its users instead of Slopya, but they're too stubborn and stupid to do that. |
|
Been 5 years and this very rudimentary feature is still missing. using Star lists helps but the most popular repository platform shouldn't be missing basic stuff like this. |
|
I have been missing this ever since I left a workplace where we used Gitlab... Hope this can be implemented here at Github. |
|
+1 |
|
On page 1 of the discussions list (sorting by upvotes), the last item has 833 upvotes. With 200 more upvotes, this topic will appear on page 1. If you'd like to make this happen, please share it and ask your teammates to upvote it. Let's make this the most requested feature!! |
|
+1 |
|
+1 |
and others
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
As my number of repositories continues to grow, I'm seeing that it would be great if there was a way to categorize all of them so I could manage them better.
My initial idea includes either doing something where they're just listed under titled headers, or a folder-like system that I could place repositories inside of.
All reactions