Slashdot Mirror
Google Code Deprecates Download Service For Project Hosting
New submitter c0d3g33k writes "Google Project Hosting announced changes to the Download service on Wednesday, offering only 'increasing misuse of the service and a desire to keep our community safe and secure' by way of explanation. Effective immediately, existing projects that offer no downloads and all new projects will no longer be able to create downloads. Existing projects which currently have downloads will lose the ability to create new downloads by January 2014, though existing downloads will remain available 'for the foreseeable future.' Google Drive is recommended as an alternative, but this will likely have to be done manually by project maintainers since the ability to create and manage downloads won't be part of the Project Hosting tools. This is a rather baffling move, since distributing project files via download is integral to FOSS culture."
Becomes, "Don't Be Open."
This is a rather baffling move, since distributing project files via download is integral to FOSS culture."
Considering the recent spate of incidents involving Google taking a shit on the FOSS community that helped to create it, I don't find it baffling at all.
Google is finally turning into the dickhead actor who got rich and forgot who his real friends are.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Google seems to be in a "Fuck everything I've ever done!" phase.
Github did exactly the same thing quite some time ago, and people didn't complain too much. Why is this a big deal?
Github did the same thing last year.
Github did this recently too which was annoying, because it was useful. They're not entirely clear why ... "confusing" doesn't seem nearly as likely as "abuse", though I am not aware of any abuse in particular. Since Google is providing Drive as an alternative, and not even immediately removing the service for those using it, it's not even as bad as Github's move, which removed it for everyone. I suppose it's an opportunity to cut another Google dependency though if you really want.
Don't think of it as a flame---it's more like an argument that does 3d6 fire damage
I know more than a few projects using code.google.com that have downloads from a separate server, perhaps to get around some inconvienences already built into the system.
Maybe the cost of bandwidth is getting to be significant, or maybe it is due to abuse. The announcement seems to suggest people were creating projects just to distribute large files, probably copyrighted material, (and possibly malware), and getting Google to host it for free.
Still, if you have to set up two or more different services to host your project, why would you bother with the one that didn't allow project downloads? What would be the point of using that on a community project? It would seem this would drive the community away. Perhaps this telegraphs the death knell for yet another Google service?
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
just use
svn checkout enter-url-here
It's how I download everything from google code, and for github I use git. or is the command line "too ancient" to use anymore?
while
My MOM knows what BitTorrent is. It's available on nearly every platform in existence; there's even a javascript client, I think? Some browsers now have clients built-in or available via extensions. With DHT supported by most every client, you don't even need a tracker. Web seeding means you don't have to guarantee seeded peers if you've got some HTTP mirror available somewhere.
So, can FOSS projects please grow up and start using bittorrent more? Can we make torrents a little more transparent to users, as well? As in, you click a link and you don't need to do anything else, no external programs, etc? Some big projects like Libreoffice have been using BitTorrent for a while; distributions have been as well even longer.
PS:For the love of god, please pick a sensible chunk size *glares at people who create 300MB torrents with 4MB chunk sizes*
Please help metamoderate.
Didn't we all see this coming though? Google used to make it more obvious by slapping "Beta" on everything, but while we aren't paying for it we all know it's the same thing. You get what you pay for.
They try out products that they hope will eventually make them money. You adopt those products because "free" and "kind of cool". Then Google realizes that lots of things are cool, but only some things make money. Product is over, adopter cries.
I like Google products for many things, but I've never felt that I could adopt them for more than personal use because I tend to view products I buy as a long term decision based as much on their long term support prospects as their costs and functionality. That doesn't mean I'm just going to buy Microsoft, but Google has never even pretended that they are in any of this for the long haul, they just put it there and you use it until it isn't there. And when it isn't, they don't apologize because you should have known better.
I think they have a model of throwing things at a wall and seeing what sticks. Perhaps it would be better if they had a mass of product people who were as smart as their developers are and could figure out how to make these things profitable, but I don't think they do. Indeed, I think a good product person is just as rare a quantity as a good developer is, if not more so.
Remember when it was normal to move files around with standard protocols, which worked reliably and didn't require any bizarre shit? And then remember when someone came up with a great idea of offering file storage service, with the caveat that you would have to use weird special software in order to upload and download your files, so that we could move toward a situation where it's not always necessarily available (e.g., if the weird software hasn't been ported to your box yet) not as easily scriptable, and just didn't work as well?
People, when that happened, you were supposed to laugh in Dropbox's face, slapping your knee while between chuckles you weakly uttered "oh my god, what a stupid idea! And how insulting for you to think we're stupid enough to fall for it!"
That's what you were supposed to say. Instead, it seems that a bunch of people said, "oh, cooool!!!" instead.
So of course Google had to go make Google Drive, to catch up on being as horrible as Dropbox, so that Dropbox wouldn't get the whole market of stupid people. Stupid people are a valuable market.
But once they had to deal with stupid people and not-stupid people, they had a problem: wouldn't it be more profitable, if we could get non-stupid people to do things The Stupid Way? You know, run our "drive" software instead of rsync, sftp, etc?
So here we are. Thanks, everyone. Thanks for making these fucking weird nonstandard clients the new norm that everyone is expected to put up with. I just realized something: you all didn't really hate AOL, did you? It stopped being "cool" (?!) but you never understood why it wasn't cool, huh?
The last times I tried using Google Drive, if you downloaded more than one file, it would make a zip file with the files where the dates were all reset to Jan-1-1980. Does it still do that?
That's a deal-killer to me and makes the service unusable. DropBox doesn't do that - so I know it's not technically impossible to so something so difficult as preserve a file's modify-time.
well, thank the FSM that I never moved away from sourceforge. I migrated from CVS to SVN, now I moved to GIT, and their new Allura interface is quite nice. The only thing that I'm missing in the bug tracker is a way to properly define dependencies between bugs.
Quoting the comments:
Setup looks pretty simple; but, since I don't have code in Google Code, I can't put it to the test. Can anyone attest to how well this works?
Finding God in a Dog
Google taketh away.
A few hours ago, I was just thinking this might happen someday, and wondering if I should use sourceforge for the downloads of my next software releases in the coming days. Never thought that someday might be today!
Forgive them. Products of a school system that has taught them that everything they do is worthy. The world owes them. ...
A trophy to every participant. Wining and losing are the same. As long as you show up
Google owes them everything forever. Anything less in their world view really is evil.
They feel they are being ROBBED.
You can not invalidate their feelings. That will make you insensitive and evil.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Well, I usually use "genocide".
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
An additional benifit is that if you disappear, your projects will live on. If you host your files and code on your own server, when you decided to close it down, it goes with it.
I've seen far too many dead links that I would have loved to see...
here's there new Lic terms for all google code:
D&R (Death and Repudiation) License
========
This software may not be used directly by any living being. ANY use of this
software (even perfectly legitimate and non-commercial uses) until after death
is explicitly restricted. Any living being using (or attempting to use) this software
will be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
For your protection, corpses will not be punished. We respectfully request
that you submit your uses (revisions, uses, distributions, uses, etc.) to
your children, who may vicariously perform these uses on your behalf. If
you use this software and you are found to be not dead, you will be punished
to the fullest extent of the law.
If you are found to be a ghost or angel, you will be punished to the fullest
extent of the law.
After your following the terms of this license, the author has vowed to repudiate
your claim, meaning that the validity of this contract will no longer be recognized.
This license will be unexpectedly revoked (at a time which is designated to be
most inconvenient) and involved heirs will be punished to the fullest extent
of the law.
Furthermore, if any parties (related or non-related) escape the punishments
outlined herein, they will be severely punished to the fullest extent of a new
revised law that (1) expands the statement "fullest extent of the law" to encompass
an infinite duration of infinite punishments and (2) exacts said punishments
upon all parties (related or non-related).
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Or, you know, FTP.