And I recall that there are was fairly infamous tech talk at Google where he basically dismissed Google's concerns in an arrogant way.
So I'd say it's mostly a validation of git and Github's popularity with developers, that other people were willing to put in so much work to improve it.
Or am I missing something key here? Yes of course it's been extended by very smart people has new features etc etc...but a weekend project that was robust enough to handle the Linux kernel codebase for him? That's is no small feat.
Oh yes perhaps its the new meme among developers that there are no real genius architects and coders and that anyone could have done it really so why distribute props to any one creator?
Yeah given my experience I have a hard time buying into that mindset.
My point is that it didn't scale to monorepo size, and was never intended to do anything like that. (How many years did it take before Microsoft came along and decided to do it?) Making a claim like that is basically hero worship.
When software is popular enough, people will jump through all sorts of hoops to extend it and maintain compatibility with it. (For example, POSIX, JavaScript, Java, or even PHP.) These technologies all have their good parts and bad parts. The quality of the design is less important than whether it fulfilled a need successfully and appeared at the right time.