4 ms·

> What is the advantage of using Sourceforge these days when github and bitbucket are free for open source? I imagine the author figures that moving is a pain.

by xienze 12y ago

> What is the advantage of using Sourceforge these days when github and bitbucket are free for open source? I imagine the author figures that moving is a pain. Don't forget, Sourceforge was the Github of yesteryear. I imagine in 10 years we may very well be asking the same of some old project hosted on Github.

StefanKarpinski 12y ago
Sourceforge's downfall was not finding a better business model than advertising – which has devolved into the worst kind of spammy ads. GitHub, on the other hand, has a solid business model that doesn't involve advertising. In fact, putting ads on the site would be suicide.
- xienze 12y ago
  Sure, but you can't say with certainty that Github's fortunes won't change X years down the line is my point.
  - thramp 12y ago
    That’s true, but the risks are significantly diminished. As they say, your business model is your destiny, and if have a good business model...
- imroot 12y ago
  Sourceforge tried to find a better business model -- sourceforge enterprise edition -- but then spun it off and then sold it to a different company (CollabNet) in 2007...then over the next 3-5 years, laid off almost everyone behind sourceforge.net/OSDN. The only thing left of the company now is thinkgeek.
vog 12y ago
> Don't forget, Sourceforge was the Github of yesteryear. Not really. At that time, there were almost no alternatives. Sourceforge was slow and bloated, even without ads. Nobody wanted to use it, but at least it was free (in the sense of free beer). And it took them ages to support SVN in addition to CVS. When they finally supported it, many project were already thinking about switching from SVN to a distributed VCS.
- xienze 12y ago
  > Not really. How do you figure? It was "the way" to share your OSS project in its time. It wasn't great, but it was the best we had.
  - vog 12y ago
    > It was "the way" to share your OSS project in its time Nobody questions that. But that doesn't quality for "the GitHub of that time", because most people like to use GitHub, so the analogy is incomplete in some essential aspects.
    - FireBeyond 12y ago
      Eh, that's pretty nebulous. There's a whole lot not to like about GitHub, too. Vaguely hand wavy "oh that doesn't count cuz most people like GitHub" isn't really much proof of anything.
      - emj 12y ago
        If you had the resources to host your own tracker/repository/wiki/mailinglist instead of using Sourceforge you did that. Github is so good it's actually hard to convince people it would be a good idea to have server for those things, even if money and time isn't the issue.
      - vog 12y ago
        Not sure what you mean by "proof". Just take it as an anecdote of a contemporary witness. From your previous comments it seems that you didn't have to suffer through that time. Lucky you!
        FireBeyond 12y ago
        Hah, not quite. I've been in IT since 1995, suffered a layoff in the first dotcom crash. Don't get me wrong, Sourceforge has never been something I liked, but that didn't mean I agreed with the premise.

by xienze 12y ago

StefanKarpinski 12y ago

Sourceforge's downfall was not finding a better business model than advertising – which has devolved into the worst kind of spammy ads. GitHub, on the other hand, has a solid business model that doesn't involve advertising. In fact, putting ads on the site would be suicide.

xienze 12y ago
Sure, but you can't say with certainty that Github's fortunes won't change X years down the line is my point.
- thramp 12y ago
  That’s true, but the risks are significantly diminished. As they say, your business model is your destiny, and if have a good business model...
imroot 12y ago
Sourceforge tried to find a better business model -- sourceforge enterprise edition -- but then spun it off and then sold it to a different company (CollabNet) in 2007...then over the next 3-5 years, laid off almost everyone behind sourceforge.net/OSDN. The only thing left of the company now is thinkgeek.

vog 12y ago

> Don't forget, Sourceforge was the Github of yesteryear. Not really. At that time, there were almost no alternatives. Sourceforge was slow and bloated, even without ads. Nobody wanted to use it, but at least it was free (in the sense of free beer). And it took them ages to support SVN in addition to CVS. When they finally supported it, many project were already thinking about switching from SVN to a distributed VCS.

xienze 12y ago
> Not really. How do you figure? It was "the way" to share your OSS project in its time. It wasn't great, but it was the best we had.
- vog 12y ago
  > It was "the way" to share your OSS project in its time Nobody questions that. But that doesn't quality for "the GitHub of that time", because most people like to use GitHub, so the analogy is incomplete in some essential aspects.
  - FireBeyond 12y ago
    Eh, that's pretty nebulous. There's a whole lot not to like about GitHub, too. Vaguely hand wavy "oh that doesn't count cuz most people like GitHub" isn't really much proof of anything.
    - emj 12y ago
      If you had the resources to host your own tracker/repository/wiki/mailinglist instead of using Sourceforge you did that. Github is so good it's actually hard to convince people it would be a good idea to have server for those things, even if money and time isn't the issue.
    - vog 12y ago
      Not sure what you mean by "proof". Just take it as an anecdote of a contemporary witness. From your previous comments it seems that you didn't have to suffer through that time. Lucky you!
      - FireBeyond 12y ago
        Hah, not quite. I've been in IT since 1995, suffered a layoff in the first dotcom crash. Don't get me wrong, Sourceforge has never been something I liked, but that didn't mean I agreed with the premise.