Re-introducing the GitHub Public Roadmap 🗺️

[github-staff]

Re-introducing the GitHub Public Roadmap

We are excited to introduce the refreshed GitHub public roadmap! We have dedicated the last few months to an extensive holistic review of the GitHub product roadmap and are now excited to release this refreshed and improved version. This refresh will make it easier for you to follow our progress, double-click on upcoming features, and provide a more accurate reflection of GitHub’s development priorities over the next 12 months.

What’s new

We have added new releases to the project board and sorted the releases into Product Focus Area and by release phase.

Each item on the board links to a detailed issue with more information about what we’re planning, why it’s valuable, and when we tentatively expect to deliver it. You can also watch the repository or subscribe to individual roadmap issues to be notified about changes directly within GitHub.

As part of our efforts to align with our evolving product vision, we’ve refined the roadmap by updating issues and introducing new ones that better reflect our current direction. If an issue you were following was removed from the roadmap, it may resurface in a future update and we are adding details to the removed issues to help you understand what’s coming next.

We remain committed to keeping the roadmap updated regularly and enhancing transparency through our quarterly webinars, which provide an in-depth, interactive way to stay connected to our product roadmap and latest releases.

Share your feedback

If you have feedback about the roadmap refresh, feel free to engage with your GitHub representative or raise your thoughts in the comments. 👇 We plan on continuing to iterate and improve our roadmap as we hear your feedback! 📣

[hauntsaninja]

@ankneis I don't want to shoot the messenger, but since you explicitly recommended continuing the conversation here:

• Is there a place I can subscribe to for this specific feature like Commenting on unchanged lines in a pull request github/roadmap#347 or Reply to PR-level comments github/roadmap#552 where I get notified when it is implemented?
• You mentioned posting a sentence or two of extra detail here: Commenting on unchanged lines in a pull request github/roadmap#347 (comment) . I was a little confused by the claim "Code review improvements remain a key priority for us" given that as far as I can tell, there is only one issue in the above roadmap related to code review, which is an AI reviewing thing (that is maybe enterprise only?)

This situation was a nice opportunity to go over the roadmap though, e.g. I'm excited to see what github/roadmap#1036 will look like, especially the more advanced search.

Finally, some unsolicited advice... The language around this rollout has been pretty corporate and vague — while people will always be unhappy to see their feature requests officially deprioritised, I'd expect you'd have gotten a better response either a) using more direct language, b) not explicitly soliciting feedback you didn't actually want to hear (i.e. just keep the announcement post locked)

[AA-Turner]

Hi @ankneis,

To echo @hauntsaninja, both of the mentioned (missing) features are frequent annoyances when using GitHub, and it seems a loss that there aren't tracking items for them any more.

Code review is one of the most frequent interactions I (and I would posit many other maintainers of large projects) have with GitHub, and it feels like a real opportunity loss. The AI-type features mentioned can be emulated using external tools, but these are limitations of the platform itself which we can't, as end-users, work-around.

I do hope to hear good news in the future, and thank you for the invitation to write on this forum.

A

[samus-aran]

Hi @hauntsaninja (& @AA-Turner too)

A lot of great points! I can only speak to the community communication side of things, but we hear you loud and clear—there’s definitely room for us to improve how we communicate.

Your feedback is incredibly valuable to us, and we absolutely want to hear it. We locked the roadmap discussion to guide users here, where we have a dedicated team of community managers and PMs actively monitoring the forums. This setup allows us to engage better and respond more quickly than we could in the roadmap discussions.

As for tracking closed roadmap items, you can still stay updated by subscribing to them.

This way, you’ll be notified about any status updates or new comments. On top of that, we’re putting together a list of focused feedback discussions tied to specific roadmap items. This will give you a chance to join those conversations and share your thoughts directly with our team.

I’ve pulled the two items you mentioned, and we’ll review our previous communication to ensure we’re guiding users more directly. 👍

• Commenting on unchanged lines in a pull request github/roadmap#347
  • Allow PR reviewers to comment on unchanged files
• Reply to PR-level comments github/roadmap#552
  • Top level PR comment thread

Really appreciate your straightforward feedback—thank you! ❤️

[hauntsaninja]

Thank you so much! Great to hear the closed roadmap issues will still be updated if reprioritised. And thank you for linking to the equivalent discussions on community, I've subscribed to those as well :-)

[richard-sim]

Adding yet-another vote how massively disappointing the removal of github/roadmap#347 and github/roadmap#552 from the roadmap is.

347 is especially disappointing, as it's incredibly common to have to point out omissions in PR's that need to be addressed, and since they're omissions, by definition they aren't edited lines, so can't be commented on!

552 is a little less disappointing to me, as I never, ever use PR-level comments because they're so useless. That might be a sign that the issue should be addressed... just say'n.

We're (almost) all dev's here - we understand product prioritization, and how hard it can be. But please listen to your users here, as you're putting features that should be considered core product functionality in the ice box in order to prioritize glossy marketing features. Yes, there needs to be a balance. This is not it.

[fajpunk]

I too am very dissapointed that github/roadmap#347 and github/roadmap#552 are not going to be implemented.

[FrancescoBonizzi]

Also github/roadmap#824 (More control over required status checks for pull requests using merge queue) has been abandoned. Sad.

This is a common use case where certain PR checks should be skipped based on specific filters.

In our monorepo, we have three main projects:

• Mobile App
• Web
• Backend

We use three PR action checks, each filtered by folder. As a safety measure, it’s crucial to block merging into the main branch if the relevant check hasn’t passed. However, without this feature, we’re forced to leave all checks optional, which compromises safety.

The ideal solution would be to just send a skip signal to the required check when a pr action is skipped due to path filters!

[mgu-voyado]

I know echoing the same thing over and over doesn't add much meaningful conversation, but since feedback is better than silence I also want to highlight github/roadmap#347 as something very dear to me and I hope it can return to the roadmap sooner rather than later :)

[Danielku15]

I'd like to revive the discussion around github/roadmap#930. It was quite a clear backlog item and considering the deprecation of artifacts v3, and the performance impact of using it, I am voting to bring this back to the new roadmap.

I cannot judge the remaining efforts to actually bring the new artifact backend to GHES but Github.com has it today, so the software should be capable of it. I also assume it is cumbersome for you to maintain the old artifact backend as part of GHES for all the releases.

I hope to see some feedback and insights on the plans for artifact v4 support. TBH, we currently do not care much about any of the planned items for GHES for Q1 and Q2. But the artifact v3 costs us time&money every day.