RepoClean faces a fundamental positioning problem selling a paid solution in a market flooded with free alternatives. The core issue is competing on features where 'good enough' free solutions exist.
Zero-configuration GitHub app for org-wide branch cleanup with dashboard visibility
Small teams and indie developers who value time over money, plus enterprises with many repositories
Pull Panda Acquisition Reveals Market Gap
GitHub acquired Pull Panda for code review features, not branch cleanup. This suggests GitHub sees value in repository hygiene but hasn't built comprehensive tooling yet.
Why it matters: Validates the space but shows GitHub's focus is elsewhere - opportunity to own the branch cleanup niche
Add activation tracking (time-to-first-cleanup, feature adoption)
Instrument key user actions to understand activation patterns
Add exit survey for churned users
3-question survey for users who uninstall or don't return
Create GitHub Marketplace listing with 'why paid vs free' positioning
Position against free alternatives with clear value prop
Prepare and execute improved HN Show HN launch
Frame around insight not product, acknowledge free alternatives
Build 'org-wide dashboard' feature showing all repos' branch health
Unified view across entire GitHub organization
Write definitive 'Repository Hygiene Guide' for Dev.to
Comprehensive guide covering all options including competitors
Start answering branch-related questions on Stack Overflow/Reddit weekly
Weekly helpful answers building toward soft promotion
Implement 'before/after' visualization on first run
Dashboard showing branch cleanup results and impact
4,758,886 ranking keywords
131 ranking keywords
“Our team's repo has started to become bloated with stale branches”
“Stale branches confuse developers who can't tell what's active, waste time in branch lists and autocomplete, create ambiguity about what's deployed”
“I got tired of manually cleaning up stale local git branches”
“In my company, we manage multiple microservices, each with its own repository. Over time, stale branches accumulated—some dating back months”
Weekly signups
10
Signup → Install rate
Measured
Install → First cleanup rate
Measured
7-day retention
Measured
Monthly churn rate
<10%
MRR
$450
Per-Repo Setup Fatigue Is Real Pain Point
Free Actions require YAML configuration per repository. For orgs with 20+ repos, this becomes genuinely painful setup and maintenance burden.
Clear differentiation opportunity - org-wide setup vs per-repo configuration
CI/CD Slowdown Is Enterprise Pain Point
Dev.to article detailed how stale branches cause GitHub API rate limiting and Jenkins pipeline slowdowns. This is a cost/performance argument for larger teams.
Potential enterprise positioning around performance impact rather than just cleanliness
The '100 Branches Problem' Is Common
Multiple Reddit threads mention repositories with 50-200+ stale branches where manual cleanup becomes genuinely painful and free Actions feel inadequate.
Target users who've crossed the threshold where free solutions become insufficient
Stale Bot Backlash Creates Positioning Opportunity
HN thread titled 'GitHub Stale Bots – A False Economy' shows developers frustrated with aggressive bots closing legitimate issues.
Can position as 'intelligent cleanup that doesn't annoy contributors' vs dumb automation
RepoClean faces a fundamental positioning problem. You're selling a paid solution in a market flooded with free alternatives—multiple GitHub Actions (Remove Stale Branches, Cleaning up Stale Branches, actions/stale) do essentially the same thing at zero cost. GitHub itself offers automatic branch deletion after merge as a native setting. Pull Panda, which had similar functionality, was acquired by GitHub and made free. Your 4-month plateau isn't a marketing problem—it's a market signal.
The good news: the pain point is real. My research surfaced developers consistently complaining about branch sprawl, stale branches slowing CI/CD, and confusion about what's active. Stack Overflow threads, Reddit discussions, and dev.to articles confirm this is a recurring frustration, especially on teams with many contributors. The problem isn't demand—it's that free solutions exist and "good enough" is winning.
Your path forward requires one of two pivots: either go radically simpler than free alternatives (one-click setup, zero configuration, beautiful dashboard that shows the mess before/after) targeting developers who don't want to write YAML, or go deeper into enterprise repository governance where free Actions fall short. Given your 10 hours/week constraint, I recommend the former—become the "set and forget" option for small teams and indie developers who value time over money.
| Stage | Current State | Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Acquisition | ~8-10 new signups/month (estimated from "barely covers churn") | Weak. Single HN post, tiny Twitter, Reddit removing posts. No sustainable channel. |
| Activation | Unknown free-to-active conversion | Unknown. Critical gap—you need to instrument this. |
| Retention | Churn roughly equals new signups | Poor. 4-month plateau suggests ~10-15% monthly churn on free tier. |
| Revenue | $380 MRR from 28 customers (~$13.50 ARPU) | Low ARPU suggests pricing may be too cheap for the value delivered. |
| Referral | No evidence of referral program or organic word-of-mouth | Non-existent. No viral mechanics. |
The core issue: You have an activation and retention problem masquerading as an acquisition problem. Getting more signups won't help if they're not converting and not staying. However, since you specified acquisition as your focus, I'll optimize for that while flagging where acquisition efforts will fail without fixing downstream.
| Competitor | Type | Price | Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GitHub native settings | Built-in | Free | Zero friction, already there | Only handles post-merge deletion, no stale branch detection |
| Remove Stale Branches Action | GitHub Action | Free | 44 stars, active maintenance, configurable | Requires YAML setup, no dashboard, no cross-repo view |
| Cleaning up Stale Branches Action | GitHub Action | Free | Similar functionality | Less popular, fewer features |
| actions/stale | GitHub Action | Free | Official GitHub action, well-maintained | Focused on issues/PRs, not branches |
| Custom scripts | DIY | Free | Exactly what you want | Maintenance burden, no UI |
| Pull Panda (acquired) | Was SaaS | Free (now part of GitHub) | Was the market leader | Acquired, core features absorbed into GitHub |
Key insight: There is no successful paid competitor in this exact space. Pull Panda was acquired before proving the standalone market. This is either a massive opportunity or a warning that the market won't pay. Given the proliferation of free alternatives, I lean toward the latter for the core feature set.
| Channel | Fit | Effort | Expected CAC | Priority |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hacker News (retry) | High | Low | ~$0 | 1 |
| GitHub Marketplace listing | High | Low | ~$0 | 2 |
| Targeted Reddit (non-promotional) | Medium | Medium | ~$0 | 3 |
| Dev.to articles | Medium | Medium | ~$0 | 4 |
| Twitter/X (building in public) | Low | High | ~$0 | 5 |
| SEO/Content | Low | High | ~$0 | 6 |
| Cold outreach to eng managers | Medium | High | Unknown | 7 |
| Paid ads | Low | Medium | Likely $50-150 | Not recommended |
Channel Explanations
Hacker News (retry): Your first attempt underperformed. The key is framing—don't post "I built a GitHub app for branch cleanup." Post a genuine observation or pain point: "Ask HN: How do you handle branch sprawl in repos with 10+ contributors?" or a Show HN with a hook that acknowledges the free alternatives exist and explains why you built something different anyway. Timing matters—weekday mornings US time, avoid major news days.
GitHub Marketplace: If you're not listed, you're invisible to developers browsing for solutions. The marketplace is low-traffic but high-intent. Your listing copy needs to immediately address "why pay when free Actions exist."
Reddit (non-promotional): Your posts got removed because you were self-promoting. The Reddit playbook for dev tools: answer questions genuinely in r/git, r/github, r/devops, r/webdev. When someone asks "how do you handle stale branches?", give a real answer with multiple options, mention yours as one option with full disclosure. Build karma and credibility over 2-3 months before any direct promotion.
Dev.to: Write the definitive guide to repository hygiene. Cover all the free options, the tradeoffs, the edge cases. Mention RepoClean as your solution at the end. This is SEO and credibility building combined.
Twitter (deprioritized): With 200 followers, you're shouting into the void. Building a Twitter following takes consistent daily effort over 6-12 months. Not compatible with 10 hours/week when you have a product to maintain.
- Stop random Twitter posting. 200 followers means zero distribution. Either commit to a 6-month daily building-in-public strategy or redirect those hours elsewhere.
- Stop trying to out-feature free alternatives on core cleanup. You won't win by having more YAML configuration options than a free Action. Win on experience, simplicity, or scope.
- Stop treating this as purely an acquisition problem. You don't know your activation rate. You don't know why people churn. Spending more to fill a leaky bucket wastes effort.
- Stop one-shot marketing attempts. One HN post, then nothing. One Reddit post, removed, then quit. Compounding requires consistency over months.
- Stop hiding the price. If your pricing isn't crystal clear on the homepage, you're attracting freebie-seekers who will never convert. Filter early.
| Action | Impact | Confidence | Ease | ICE Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Add activation tracking (time-to-first-cleanup, feature adoption) | 8 | 9 | 7 | 24 |
| Create GitHub Marketplace listing with "why paid vs free" positioning | 7 | 7 | 8 | 22 |
| Build "org-wide dashboard" feature showing all repos' branch health | 9 | 6 | 4 | 19 |
| Write definitive "Repository Hygiene Guide" for Dev.to | 6 | 7 | 6 | 19 |
| Prepare and execute improved HN Show HN launch | 8 | 5 | 7 | 20 |
| Add exit survey for churned users | 7 | 8 | 8 | 23 |
| Implement "before/after" visualization on first run | 7 | 6 | 5 | 18 |
| Start answering branch-related questions on Stack Overflow/Reddit weekly | 5 | 7 | 7 | 19 |
Track weekly starting now:
| Metric | Category | Current | Week 2 Target | Week 4 Target |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Weekly signups | Acquisition | ~2-3 | 5 | 10 |
| Signup → Install rate | Activation | Unknown | Measured | Measured |
| Install → First cleanup rate | Activation | Unknown | Measured | Measured |
| 7-day retention | Retention | Unknown | Measured | Measured |
| Monthly churn rate | Retention | ~10-15% (est) | Measured | <10% |
| MRR | Revenue | $380 | $380 | $450 |
| Paying customers | Revenue | 28 | 28 | 32 |
| NPS/satisfaction | Referral | Unknown | Survey sent | Score measured |
Template 1: Dev.to Article Structure
Title: "GitHub Repository Hygiene: The Complete Guide to Branch Cleanup in 2025"