Agreed, obviously there are considerations of:

A. System design and architecture

B. Problem understanding and solving

C. Team work and communication including navigating and working with stakeholders

D. Building requirements and negotiating tradeoffs

E. Ability to deliver consistently and reliability

F. Inventive and resourceful thinking

(Obviously this is non-exhaustive, but some top of mind considerations)

But at the end the deliverable is a combination of documentation, code and software is it not?

Supposing $COMPANY had an interview structure as follows:

1. Basic technical screen: Confirm candidate can program

2. System design: Evaluate candidate's ability to design systems

3. Algorithmic problem solving: Evaluate abstract problem solving

4. Behaviourial interview: Determine if candidate is good fit

Where would you map the above A-F or any other critical elements which I may have missed to how they manifest in 1-4?

At the end the deliverable is a working product. A hiring manager can't determine ability to work as part of a team to deliver a commercially successful product just by looking at open source code.

Also note that in the real world, many of the best developers have nothing to show on GitHub. All of their code is proprietary closed source.

> But at the end the deliverable is a combination of documentation, code and software is it not?

No. At the end the deliverable is built based on communication between individuals on a team. If that doesn't work, it doesn't matter how good the code produced by your individuals is; it's going to be a mess.