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."

Comments

So, "Don't Be Evil..."

[CanHasDIY]

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.

Re:So, "Don't Be Evil..."

[Luthair]

Github also had to discontinue file downloads for the simple fact that people abused it and used the service as a way to distribute content unrelated to the open source material.

Re:So, "Don't Be Evil..."

[larry bagina]

They're pushing google drive for downloads. That makes sense on a couple levels -- forced encouragement of google drive and removing redundant functionality -- but this is google so you have to wonder what's next. So... what is next? Will you need to login with google+ to download? Maybe click a few adds before your download begins? Auto download Chrome for you, just in case?

Re:So, "Don't Be Evil..."

[chris_mahan]

Can't use google drive from work.

Re:So, "Don't Be Evil..."

[DragonWriter]

Any public file sharing system is liable to be abused period. This includes version control systems.

(1) Version control systems, unlike file downloads, are central to the purpose for which Google provides Google Code, to wit, facilitate developer-to-developer collaboration on open-source projects.
(2) Version control systems, unlike file downloads, are not particularly widely abused for hosting malware to be distributed through emailing deceptive links to unsophisticated users.

Re:So, "Don't Be Evil..."

[Anonymous Coward]

Would be quite popular, I imagine. All that forking, pushing and pulling!

Re:So, "Don't Be Evil..."

[DragonWriter]

How are people abusing Google Code?

Using the file download hosting feature to host malware and sending emails with deceptive links to that malware to distribute it to unsuspecting users seems to be one of the main abuses.

Re:So, "Don't Be Evil..."

[Anonymous Coward]

I suspect you may have misunderstood how one would actually abuse this.

I email you (or, say, your mom) a link saying Malwarebytes v.10 is now available for download, and it fixes a critical vulnerability and needs to be updated soon or you're at risk. Go to code.google.com/malwarebytes , a project that I've created. I might even populate it with something looking like code that would match, to trick people who are more technical than they really are.

A non-technical user may see that it's it's hosted at Google, and, having some trust for them, they choose to download. Your prompt shows up (what that accomplishes I don't know, so I assume the user, already intent on downloading it, answers it.)

So, by your second rule, they download MalwareBytes.zip, which contains MalwareBytes.exe (actually malware), and voila. 0wned.

And no one was surprised

[Anonymous Coward]

Google seems to be in a "Fuck everything I've ever done!" phase.

So?

[Anonymous Coward]

Github did exactly the same thing quite some time ago, and people didn't complain too much. Why is this a big deal?

Re:So?

[Rakishi]

People did complain. Amusingly, the biggest counterpoint was that if you want to offer downloads you should probably use google code which is much more user (rather than programmer) friendly.

Re:So?

[Anonymous Coward]

I prefer avoiding pseudocode altogether, wouldn't want users to get too comfortable. i prefer this approach - a single source file with these contents:

File name: AwesomeSoftware.cpp
/*

        don't forget #include the stuff your software will need to compile and run!

        enter your code below in proper C++ syntax. It should do what you need.

        If you don't know what to write, you should probably go read lots of books
        and take a 4 year undergraduate program in Computer Science. Then
        maybe you won't be such a fucking retard, luser. I don't work for you, and
        I sure as shit am not getting paid by you.

        This file is licensed using GPLv3.

*/

I like to then provide a makefile with these contents:

# Make sure you have no errors in your file before you attempt to build!
all :
          @ echo "Compiling your shit."
          g++ AwesomeSoftware.cpp -o AwesomeSoftware
          @ echo "Cleaning up!"
          rm -f AwesomeSoftware.cpp

I find this to be the best way to spread the good word of open source and teach people good development practices.

God Bless Richard Stallman. God Bless Linus Torvalds.

Re:in future news

[Desler]

Github did the same thing last year.

Github did this recently

[oGMo]

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.

Re:Github did this recently

[Anonymous Coward]

True. But Google Drive is not exactly known for easy to read URLs.

What are you talking about, [USER_TYPE:HUMAN UNIT:670288]? [LINE FEED] Values derived from hash functions of sufficient length are superior sorting and indexing mechanisms for long-term persistence of non-volatile data structures. The use of values that map directly to integers provide search efficiency of big-O-one as opposed to [STRING] searching, which is typically big-O-log-n or worse. You, [USER_TYPE:HUMAN UNIT:670288], must have a malfunction in your [LOGIC-PROCESSING DESIGN] and must obtain maintenance before further conversation can be attempted reliably. [END COMMUNICATION]

Only affects Google hosting?

[icebike]

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?

We've heard of BitTorrent, haven't we?

[SuperBanana]

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*

Re:what's wrong with the command line

[Todd Knarr]

Because the average user doesn't want the source code, they want to download a prepared binary in an installer or zipfile?

Meanwhile, SourceForge reaches out to developers

[MAXOMENOS]

Quoting the comments:

Roberto Galoppini May 23, 2013 at 12:40 PM

SourceForge welcomes Google Code open source developers, to distribute downloads from our open source platform.

We serve over 150 Million+ downloads each month, reaching 42 Million+ unique visitors. We help tiny projects as well as whales like Apache OpenOffice to distribute their downloads via our worldwide mirror network.

By distributing your releases at SourceForge you’ll get a complete download analytics, and the opportunity to tap into a large open source community. We already serve other ecosystems by offering their hosted projects our download facilities, including Githubbers.

As a trusted partner for open source we're glad to help. https://sourceforge.net/publish/?source=googlecode

[Disclosure: I work for SourceForge]

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?