For some years, my default thought was: free software is on github, it is *the* means by which the source code is made available, people can contribute (or can not, the maintaner can decide), fork, post bugs, and the file can be directly downloaded (with some other options, of course, but the main scheme can be translated to what a github-site is).

I'm not a developer nor anything, I just like to absorb some knowledge, so this is a layman perspective. Listening to your show gave me a breath of fresh air: "No, this is not a must for free software". In one example, as you gave: the software may have its own web page, freely made (to be known), but entirely maintained by exchanges of talk and code by e-mail, in a mailing list.

All you brought here gave me a perspective of much more simplicity, rethinking what I envision as free software today. Because, many times, many projects, there are issues opened, and no answer ever, even with development going on, like saying: "we are in github, with all the resources it brings, by inertia (because everybody does), but we don't give attention to users or developers)". A talk you gave to rethink what developers want with their software, and do according to the objetives. Thanks for the show.

Sorry if I expressed bad, not wanting to diminish nor intending to summarize what you said.