"but they also must know Azure is not stable enough"

In what universe is this true? Azure is the backbone of large things in corporate America, especially in banking and healthcare that you never even think about. Things a lot more important than someone's repo being inconvenienced.

Any migration will be painful, but to say Azure as a service isn't up to the task is just nonsense.

From practical experience, I would say Azure is a moving target currently. Things beyond virtual machine and networks feel like moving targets.

For the sectors you cited that might not matter since those will not be using cloud resources but rather the common virtual machine workload.

I'm not sure what planet you live on, but there are plenty of things far bigger and more important than GitHub running in Azure.

GitLab was hosted on Azure just fine for a long period, before moving off recently for optics reasons.

It wasn't for optics reasons; that was entirely coincidental. It was announced well before the GitHub acquisition that we were moving to GCP, primarily for better Kubernetes integration [0].

[0] https://about.gitlab.com/2018/04/05/gke-gitlab-integration/

You've got enough rebuttal on your doubt of Azure.

But another issue with this comment is this:

> in RackSpace and AWS

As far as I can tell, they moved off RackSpace a long time ago. And they only use AWS infrastructure for peering, which makes sense with the amount of AWS machines that pull code from Github. The majority of the heavy lifting is done in Github's own data centers: https://githubengineering.com/evolution-of-our-data-centers/

I remember when they moved Hotmail to Windows servers, took more than one try, if memory serves.

Microsoft uses other providers from time to time, I know a few of their services which reside in IBM's SoftLayer too.