Interestingly, I actually did the opposite. I started with GitHub Issues as my note taking place, used that for several years. And then eventually moved away from it to Org Notes as a centralized system for all projects. Some of my reasons were:
- it's centralized; sometimes projects are related and being able to search for "all project notes involving LEDs" is useful across repos
- sometimes project work is not solely related to code, and in that case your notes are split between repo-notes and non-repo-notes
- Git issues build up and become huge threads over time, lack hierarchical organization or advanced state/dependency tracking, rely on arbitrary tags, etc.
- Git issues are non-personal, often public-facing - and even on personal repos there is sometimes the thought that you might publish the git repo one day, and now it's littered with your private thoughts.
- During dev, the process often is a bit experimental in nature - this amounts to tons of failed ideas or dead notes that clutter issue db
- Not a lot of support for the note-type distinction between "moonshot"-style rough ideas and actual concrete projects. If you use GitHub Issues for all your notes, you'll have all your wacky ideas mixed in with your actual issues. You'll subconsciously avoid posting the wild ones which means you'll subconsciously damper your creativity.
All of these lead me to suggest sticking with a well-designed centralized project note-taking system, use GitHub Issues to track /issues/ and then /link/ to the issue in your note-taking system (ideally with a little automation glue) or simply avoid GH Issues entirely for your personal issue tracking and work directly off of your notes system.