By June, Reposible was still young, but the questions we asked had already changed. In April, we proved we could launch something and learn from feedback. In June, we started to see what Reposible should really be. A talk with our old teammate Nick became a turning point. It showed us that Reposible had to be bigger, clearer, and more true to who we are.
In early June, Bert and I met with Nick, a colleague we had worked with before. Nick has always had a clear and forward-looking view, so we asked him for feedback. He told us he believed in a pivot: moving away from a startup focused on integrations, and instead building an open-source project with repository management at its core.
This talk opened our eyes. We spoke about more than integrations. Pipelines, rulesets, and dependencies came up, not as separate tools, but as parts of one strong and unique developer experience. We also looked at projects like Posthog and Papermark, which inspired us to think bigger.
That’s when we made a key decision: open source would become our identity. Not just by sharing our code, but also by being open about our process, our ideas, and even our mistakes. We realized that our first steps didn’t really feel like us. We had started in a way that “looked normal,” but it wasn’t honest to who we were. Now we chose a path that gave us energy.
This also meant reworking our website and our tone of voice. We wanted to speak more clearly, be more accessible, and keep people engaged. Nick also pointed out something else: the people behind the project were missing. It wasn’t because we didn’t want to show ourselves, but because we hadn’t found the right way to do it yet. Making Reposible more human became another important task.
Meanwhile, Bert and I kept talking every day about everything: from design and platform details to vision and philosophy. Thanks to those conversations, and feedback from friends and developers, we could see a new direction for Reposible.
June was about finding clarity. We saw that Reposible is not only about solving technical problems. It’s also about how we want to build. Open source, transparency, and human connection became our pillars.
It meant more work: redesigning the website, reshaping our message, and showing who we are. But it also gave us a stronger base. From here, we weren’t just building a product. We were building in a way that felt right.