upvote

points

by ErroneousBosh2 days ago |
comments
upvoteby tvbusy1 days ago|
next
[-]
I understand that most people want to move to other more modern tools, it's up to you. However, what baffled me is why the author's choice not to move is a problem? Did we pay them to move and they did not move as promised? Was there some crowd funding to move that was not fulfilled?
reply
upvoteby ErroneousBosh1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I just didn't think Sourceforge was still running. There was a mass exodus from it about 20 years ago when it became a massive ad farm that started injecting ads into people's tarballs.

It was never as good as freshmeat.net even in its heyday.

reply
upvoteby IshKebab1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
> what baffled me is why the author's choice not to move is a problem?

Because Sourceforge is horrible to use and was at one point actively pushing malware? It's pretty obvious tbh.

reply
upvoteby SXX2 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Might be it even not using all your code to train AI. Or at least not asking your explicit permission to do it.
reply
upvoteby JimDabell2 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Not every conversation has to be a conversation about AI.
reply
upvoteby account4221 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Not every conversation but as long as GitHub is the most popular code hosting platform it's very much relevant to that discussion.
reply
upvoteby JimDabell20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
This is an article about an encryption software project getting their Microsoft account terminated. It’s not the place to spam a completely off-topic complaint about the AI use of a service completely unrelated to the project.
reply
upvoteby karel-3d2 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
sourceforge was always very scummy, I think they would definitely use the code for that if they could
reply
upvoteby mbreese2 days ago|
parent|
[-]
It wasn’t always scummy… but there was a definite shift after they got bought. It’s kept getting worse since then.

Then again, this was something like 20 years ago. Back then, Sourceforge was something closer to GitHub today. It was the de facto public source repository. You could even get an on-premise version, IIRC.

Actually, this is sounding a lot like GitHub these days… not sure what that means.

reply
upvoteby ErroneousBosh1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
As I've said elsewhere, freshmeat.net was better :-)
reply
upvoteby mbreese1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
For project discovery, definitely -- but not as a source code repository.

Wow, we're dating ourselves on this, but I remember when it was a big deal that SF.net added SVN support. They apparently didn't turn off CVS until 2017!

reply
upvoteby ErroneousBosh1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Yeah, I remember introducing a web dev company to SVN in about oh maybe 2006. Prior to that their "version control" was a webroot full of shit like "index.php", "index.php.old", "index.php.broken", "index.ryan.donottouch.php", "indexTUESDAY.php" and so on.

Yeah no, guys, that's not what I meant. Let me just show you this real quick...

I wonder if enough of freshmeat still exists on the Wayback machine to make a clone, maybe a skin for forgejo?

Simpler times, simpler everything.

reply
upvoteby egorfine2 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
And unfortunately some projects exclusively use sourceforge. Which breaks some of my CI pipelines.
reply
upvoteby yjftsjthsd-h1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Why would that break CI?
reply
upvoteby egorfine1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
sourceforge serves files inconsistently.
reply
upvoteby kome2 days ago|
prev|
[-]
yeah, it just works
reply