> "The GitHub Test" is just a sticky name to help people remember. In
practice, it is not limited to just GitHub.

Yea, that's how I interpreted it as well -- I don't have strong feelings
about the name. My point is just that the restriction of
government/military/finance access is immaterial. The test as worded should
stand, since "we should include X in the standard because Y isn't allowed
to use non-standard code" is a pretty weak argument.

On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 1:24 PM Vinnie Falco <vinnie.falco_at_[hidden]> wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 11:46 AM Jeremy Ong via SG19 <
> sg19_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
>> > A counter-point was raised that the GitHub test assumes universal
>> access; government, military, and finance sectors often mandate
>> standard-library-only code, and C++ lacks a standard package manager
>>
>> I don't see how this is much of a counter-point at all to be honest. The
>> standard shouldn't serve any specific sector, and the choice to restrict
>> external code usage to the standard is precisely that -- a choice.
>>
>
> "The GitHub Test" is just a sticky name to help people remember. In
> practice, it is not limited to just GitHub.
>
> Of course, if things continue on their current trajectory and GitHub
> becomes permanently unavailable, we may need to come up with a new name.
>
> How about "The Download Test?"
>
> Best
>
>