One of the problems raised in a session was that of dependency on big platforms: the open source ecosystem in general is fond of decentralizing and hacking in general, yet relies heavily, for reasons like visibility/resume/portfolio/comfort/ease, on github[1]. Yet, self-hosting instances has a non-negligible cost (if only in terms of maintenance and administration) so it's mostly up to each project to decide if he "can" self-host (for instance, gnome probably has enough resources, and hosts its gitlab). I think staying on gitlab.com is sort of a good compromise for us: on one hand we can benefit from not having to maintain infrastructure, and we can use the ee version, and we have the shared runners available, and we are not on a platform as closed as github, on the other hand sourceforge-like problems (while "locked on a platform") are quite unlikely: as long as hosting our own gitlab is *possible*, and as long as the option to export the whole project, along with its bugtracker data, wiki, etc, is there (in other terms: as long as not only the git repo is safe, because that is already distributed, but also the development ecosystem is not locked); we are "free" (in my opinion, feel free to disagree).
/** [1]BTW, for visibility purpose, I think it would be good to actually automatically mirror the repository on github (like gnome : https://github.com/GNOME). That way, e.g. a recruiter looking at the github profile would see the Inkscape contributions listed. (Cons: Doing it for these reasons would mostly mean acknowledging the dominant position of github for open-source code, which is kind of sad) **/