3 ms·

SF served "malware" in 2013 NOT 2006: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceForge#Adware_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceForge#Adware_controversy

SF served "malware" in 2013 NOT 2006: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceForge#Adware_controversy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceForge#Adware_controversy After slashdot was purchased from condenast (i think?)

naniwaduni 2y ago
They had a bad name for the download pages being ad-infested even before they bundled the malware in the installers. (And yes, fake download buttons on a site serving binary downloads went exactly where you'd expect.)
- BSDobelix 2y ago
  >fake download buttons Yes and today Ad-Sense (Google) took the Crown from being then biggest Scam AD's deploy-er. And really i don't think that's true before they where sold, ad's sure, scam/malware stuff? I don't think so...at least i cant remember.
DannyBee 2y ago
I mean, that's just when they did it fairly deliberately. Regardless, I think you would be hard pressed to argue SF was a great hosting environment when Google Code launched, which was the point.
- BSDobelix 2y ago
  >hard pressed to argue SF was a great hosting environment when Google Code launched But SF had FTP, Websites, SVN hosting and i think even a WIKI, so you can hardly compare it with Google-Code...and hey at least they opensource'd their "forge": https://allura.apache.org/ https://allura.apache.org/ IDK i don't have such bad memory's about SF, even today you serve big files over SF because of GH limits.
  - ndiddy 2y ago
    SourceForge was originally open source, but they later closed it. GNU Savannah (https://savannah.gnu.org/ https://savannah.gnu.org/) runs on a fork of the last open version of SourceForge.
    - BSDobelix 2y ago
      >SourceForge was originally open source True after slashdot got buy'd, they also served malware AFTER the takeover (2013), and now look at that year: Allura graduated from incubation with the Apache Software Foundation in March >>2013 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Allura https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Allura Google-Code was in 2006 right?

naniwaduni 2y ago

They had a bad name for the download pages being ad-infested even before they bundled the malware in the installers. (And yes, fake download buttons on a site serving binary downloads went exactly where you'd expect.)

BSDobelix 2y ago
>fake download buttons Yes and today Ad-Sense (Google) took the Crown from being then biggest Scam AD's deploy-er. And really i don't think that's true before they where sold, ad's sure, scam/malware stuff? I don't think so...at least i cant remember.

DannyBee 2y ago

I mean, that's just when they did it fairly deliberately. Regardless, I think you would be hard pressed to argue SF was a great hosting environment when Google Code launched, which was the point.

BSDobelix 2y ago
>hard pressed to argue SF was a great hosting environment when Google Code launched But SF had FTP, Websites, SVN hosting and i think even a WIKI, so you can hardly compare it with Google-Code...and hey at least they opensource'd their "forge": https://allura.apache.org/ https://allura.apache.org/ IDK i don't have such bad memory's about SF, even today you serve big files over SF because of GH limits.
- ndiddy 2y ago
  SourceForge was originally open source, but they later closed it. GNU Savannah (https://savannah.gnu.org/ https://savannah.gnu.org/) runs on a fork of the last open version of SourceForge.
  - BSDobelix 2y ago
    >SourceForge was originally open source True after slashdot got buy'd, they also served malware AFTER the takeover (2013), and now look at that year: Allura graduated from incubation with the Apache Software Foundation in March >>2013 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Allura https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Allura Google-Code was in 2006 right?