> obscure OS not being supported

Believe it or not, there are platforms outside of the big 3.

The GitHub Actions runner does not work on FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD, and illumos, all of which are operating systems we either have existing support for, or intend to start supporting properly soon. (We already have FreeBSD CI; machines for the other 3 are arriving at my place tomorrow as it happens.)

And that's ignoring CPU architectures; the upstream GitHub Actions runner only supports x86 and aarch64. We had to maintain a fork that adds support for all the other architectures we care about such as riscv, loongarch, s390x, etc. We will also likely be adding mips64 and powerpc64 to the mix in the future.

Even IBM have to maintain an s390x fork because Microsoft can't even be bothered to accept PRs that add more platforms: https://github.com/uweigand/runner

> They just linked to some random obscure bug

A bug that they have encountered, have reported, with a description of the root cause, and has not been fixed. A bug that has wasted their time and money.

Do the arguments have to be strong? I do not think they need to provide any justification. If the core developers decided that they would be more happy (or less miserable) with a different service, then let them.

I mean, if they've been regularly hitting said bug, does it matter how obscure it is? If I were using a tool that was broken for me personally, I'd be ditching it, too; with absolutely zero regard to whether the tool works for others.