💬 Your Product Feedback Has Been Submitted 🎉

Thank you for taking the time to share your insights with us! Your feedback is invaluable as we build a better GitHub experience for all our users.

Here's what you can expect moving forward ⏩

• Your input will be carefully reviewed and cataloged by members of our product teams. 
  • Due to the high volume of submissions, we may not always be able to provide individual responses.
  • Rest assured, your feedback will help chart our course for product improvements.
• Other users may engage with your post, sharing their own perspectives or experiences. 
• GitHub staff may reach out for further clarification or insight. 
  • We may 'Answer' your discussion if there is a current solution, workaround, or roadmap/changelog post related to the feedback.

Where to look to see what's shipping 👀

• Read the Changelog for real-time updates on the latest GitHub features, enhancements, and calls for feedback.
• Explore our Product Roadmap, which details upcoming major releases and initiatives.

What you can do in the meantime 💻

• Upvote and comment on other user feedback Discussions that resonate with you.
• Add more information at any point! Useful details include: use cases, relevant labels, desired outcomes, and any accompanying screenshots.

As a member of the GitHub community, your participation is essential. While we can't promise that every suggestion will be implemented, we want to emphasize that your feedback is instrumental in guiding our decisions and priorities.

Thank you once again for your contribution to making GitHub even better! We're grateful for your ongoing support and collaboration in shaping the future of our platform. ⭐

Nothing in the repository needs repair, and this is not a per-repo index fault: the homepage sidebar says "No contributors" on every fork. I checked 28 forks on 30 October, the other 9 forks of ARounder-183/HiFiShifter, 8 of my own, and the 10 most-starred forks on GitHub (base/chains, AlexeyAB/darknet, google/dagger and so on). _sidebar returns contributorCount: 0 for all of them, while the parent HiFiShifter returns 10 and non-fork repositories return their counts. The contributors graph and the REST endpoint are unaffected, which is exactly the split you measured. I did not find a docs page that states this, but the behaviour is uniform. The hermes-agent report added to 209776 on 30 October is a different case: a non-fork with about 60,000 commits, past the 10,000-commit limit of the contributors graph.

So no cache rebuild will change openhachimi/HachiShifter while it is a fork. The one thing in the owners' control is Settings > General > Danger Zone > "Leave fork network", which turns it into a standalone repository. That option is self-serve when the fork is public, under 1 GB and has no child forks; HachiShifter is 289 MB with 0 forks, so it qualifies. It is permanent: the fork link, issues, PRs, stars and watchers are lost, commits stay (https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/how-tos/work-with-forks/detaching-a-fork). With 230 commits of its own on dev that may be worth it to the maintainers; if not, adding your data to 209776 is the right place for the feedback.

Hello,

I can confirm the same issue on another repository:

• Repository: https://github.com/aldweb/ha-lg-hombot
• Parent repository: https://github.com/plakna/ha-lg-hombot
• Default branch: master

The repository homepage displays "No contributors", including for the repository owner.

However:

• The Insights > Contributors graph correctly lists contributors.
• The commit history filtered by author correctly lists their commits.
• The contributors' commit authorship is preserved after pull requests were merged using merge commits.

I initially contacted GitHub Support, but my ticket was automatically closed by the virtual assistant without any technical investigation.

The fact that this issue is also reported on other forks makes me suspect that the homepage sidebar does not currently display contributors for forked repositories.

Could GitHub please confirm whether this is expected behavior or a bug?

I would prefer to keep the repository within its existing fork network, so detaching it should not be considered an acceptable workaround unless GitHub confirms that this is the only solution.

Thank you.