Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi, I (Jake Hamilton) am. Though, this is not an effort that can be undertaken by one person. My goal is publishing this page was to create a set of values, goals, and a roadmap for people (like myself) who would otherwise be leaving the Nix ecosystem due to its shortcomings. These values, goals, and roadmap can then be used for alignment to actually make it a reality. I worried that if these things weren't specified…
The Microsoft GitHub requirement is the only reason that I do not contribute to NixPkgs except by sending a mail to a maintainer sometimes. Everything I package stays in my own flakes. If a community arose that hosts its own repo or is hosted at e.g. CodeBerg, I would contribute.
This has been a tough one to figure out. I do not think there is a great answer here. GitHub has a large network of people and the barrier to contributing there is fairly low. Cost is also subsidized greatly by GitHub. Nixpkgs being one of the largest and most active repositories on the entire platform would certainly strain any self-hosted or otherwise unprepared service. However, the benefits of a FOSS git forge with commitments to federation and values similar to this project also exist. Perhaps the answer here is to begin on GitHub to ease initial contributions and concerns over cost and to later transition to something like Codeberg.