3 ms·
You might want to avoid hosting files on Sourceforge since a lot of people tend to be wary of downloading anything from there.
by bborud 7y ago
You might want to avoid hosting files on Sourceforge since a lot of people tend to be wary of downloading anything from there.
- badsectoracula 7y agoSourceforge changed hands in 2016 and was bought by someone who wanted to clean it up, see https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4n3e1s/the_state_of_sourceforge_since_its_acquisition_in/ https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4n3e1s/the_state_... (2016) and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17281879 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17281879 (2018). TBH personally as a user i prefer the Sourceforge UI to Github one since it is clearly user oriented. I wrote about it last year or so: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7p9prs/introducing_the_new_sourceforge_ui_and_github/dsg0cu0/ https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7p9prs/introdu...
- petee 7y agoEh, they should have announced that a little more publicly, as their reputation is still garbage for most people...And they still have download buttons for ADs that are styled like the real download, so how would we know ::rolls eyes::
- bborud 7y agoI think I see your point. I actually like that Github tries to serve developers rather than trying to serve both developers and users. I generally like services that have a very clear focus and do not try to become everything to everyone. That being said, I don't think it would take much to add this to Github. In fact, I think it could probably be done in a few weekends with a third party application to automatically generate github pages with download buttons a(and historic binary versions). I didn't check. It might already exist.