SourceForge Debuts New UI and GitHub Sync Tool (sourceforge.net)

SourceForge on Tuesday introduced an overhaul of its website to give it a new look and add new features. Among the most notable additions, the popular repository, which hosts over 430,000 projects and 3.7 million registered developers, said it was creating a GitHub Importer tool which would enable developers to import their GitHub project to SourceForge and also sync their GitHub project file releases on SourceForce so they "can take advantage of the strengths of both platforms." In a blog post, the team wrote:We believe the open source community is always better served when there are multiple options for open source projects to live, and these options are not mutually exclusive. More improvements and new features are on track to be released throughout the year, the team wrote.

Comments

Pop-ups...

[QuietLagoon]

Hopefully they got rid of that annoying pop-up that appears every time I'm sent to the site to download something. There's no way I'd want to use such a site if that is how my visitors would be treated.

Re:Pop-ups...

[Tailhook]

Nope. Still there. Same spammy looking site it's been for 15 years. Still a pain to find the link to source code as well, when code should be what appears in front, on top, by default. Want to see changes? Can't find that list anywhere either.

Nope. Nope. Nope.

Re:Pop-ups...

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually quite liked the old style Sourceforge, where each project main page was a description with links to code browsers, wikis, forums, and the website. Github is a bit of a pain in the arse by comparison if I'm flicking through search results looking for a suitable module or project to look at (which is the usual way I'd arrive at either site).

I had a bunch of stuff on SF for years but nothing that's been actively developed for the last decade. Back in the day they had the best infrastructure (shell servers where you could create doc-gen cron jobs, for eg), but they've slowly whittled down the feature set, added a couple and aggressively added advertising wherever they could (including some software installers). Much of the cool stuff you used to be able to do there is either gone or easy and cheap to DIY with a VPS or AWS instance.

Re:Pop-ups...

[QuietLagoon]

...Nope. Still there.

Oh well. At some point websites are going to start realizing that the best way to have more participation, is to stop chasing away potential participants with annoying web site "features."

Re:Pop-ups...

[sg_oneill]

The best way these days to find packages for languages , imho are the "Awesome " compilations you'll find in various githubs. Check it. If your a C# dude, look for "Awesome C#". If your a python dude, look for "Awesome Python". They tend to be well curated and work on submissions and review, so MOST of them are fairly trusty.

However different languages have their own discovery mechanisms too. For PHP, use Packagist, and similar things exist for Gem, Pip , NPM etc.

Re:Pop-ups...

[snookiex]

What are you talking about? There's a huge tab called "Code" in every project page. If that's a pain for you to find, I can't imagine how painful it is to read the actual code. Also, I think most people want to know what's the project about (the summary) and perhaps see a few screenshots, the code, for most users, is secondary.

Re:Pop-ups...

[LesFerg]

Can't you just pull the project down and use your local GIT to view changes?

Re:Pop-ups...

[AmiMoJo]

I don't get pop ups, FWIW.

I can see that SF could serve a useful role as an end user oriented site, to complement sites like GitHub that are more developer oriented. I'm just not sure about things like having two bug trackers or if it's a viable business model.

Too little, too late

[brendan.robert]

There's literally nothing they can do to rebuild the confidence that was lost, short of just rebranding and building a new community. I don't know of anyone who has still forgiven them for injecting adware into downloads. I agree with them that developers are best served with as many options as possible, and that's why so many people have ditched them years ago. I appreciate the challenge of providing a community free service and having to find affordable ways to keep the lights on. But they botched it. Game over, man. Put a fork in it because it's done.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

Yeah I didn't like them adding adware to downloads either so I bought SourceForge and removed the adware. Doesn't really matter if we convince anyone else, we're just gonna do right by the 1 million daily users and 430,00 projects there

Re:Too little, too late

[TheRaven64]

How many of those users are actually committing code? I've gone to SF a few times recently to look at the code for orphaned projects and see if they're worth reviving, but that's about it. I'd love to see some serious competition to GitHub, but I'm not convinced that SF is in a position to provide it. GitHub at least has a solid business model (get people hooked on the free service, then sell them various degrees of hosted service).

The main advantage for a project using GitHub is the network effect. I have a couple of things hosted there and get a lot of interaction with users via the issue trackers, because the barrier to entry is tiny. Similarly, these days I am far more likely to report a bug if the project is on GitHub, because I already have an account and it's easy.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

GitHub lost $66 million last year so it's not quite solid yet. There's a lot of active projects committing code on SF despite the fact that there are a lot of inactive ones. We will make it easier to see which ones are active soon.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

I actually didn't mod him at all. It sucks that some networks still have SourceForge blocked. Hopefully in time that will change but we're just focused on improving the product and catering to our current users. It was a shame what happened to SourceForge in the first place but we had nothing to do with that and part of the reason we bought it was to get rid of the adware

Re:Too little, too late

[cascadingstylesheet]

Yeah I didn't like them adding adware to downloads either so I bought SourceForge and removed the adware. Doesn't really matter if we convince anyone else, we're just gonna do right by the 1 million daily users and 430,00 projects there

That's like buying the Chicken Ranch and trying to convince people that it's just a bar and hotel now. While still calling it the Chicken Ranch.

I mean yeah, it might work ... but good luck.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

Not really. It's like buying an open source repository that has over 30 million users per month and doing right by the people that still use it. If we get new people, great.

Re:Too little, too late

[Kernel Krumpit]

....mod him flamebait all you want, but he's right. Sourceforge has had a redirect to localhost on my network for quite some years, now.

... short of just rebranding and building a new community. I don't know of anyone who has still forgiven them for injecting adware into downloads.

... Same spammy looking site it's been for 15 years. Still a pain to find the link to source code as well, when code should be what appears in front, on top, by default. Want to see changes? Can't find that list anywhere either.

Nope. Nope. Nope.

"Fool me once.......twice, shame on me."

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

Yeah that makes sense to be skeptical of the previous ownership's decisions but we had nothing to do with it. If a building is burning down and ruining the contents inside due to the owner's neglect, do you then fault the person who buys it and puts out the fire?

Re:Too little, too late

[macklin01]

Just please make sure that the measure of activity is not just by commits, code changes, etc. Some projects are just "feature complete / done" and shouldn't be de-listed or downranked in searches.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

Hey Paul! You're right and we don't downrank just from lack of commits

Re:Too little, too late

[datavirtue]

Why in the fuck do the Code, Donate, and Forums tabs ATTEMPT to open in another tab?

Re:Too little, too late

[datavirtue]

Agreed. SF is essentially dead to developers. It could be nice place to distribute binaries or direct users to the various app stores however.

Re:Too little, too late

[datavirtue]

If the current users mattered you wouldn't have needed to rethink or rework the site. Think long and hard about what it would take to get developers to use SF again. I used to be a daily visitor that relied on SF projects. Now I cringe with paranoia and disgust each time I land on the site.

Re:Too little, too late

[datavirtue]

What the fuck are you talking about?

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

It's not that hard to understand. We are not the ones who were bundling adware. We are the ones who immediately ceased that practice. My analogy is apt.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

We have plenty of improvements coming for developers.

Re:Too little, too late

[brendan.robert]

I applaud your efforts, and I think that you're making valid decisions and are doing very good things to salvage the brand. Redesigning the site is a good step in rebuilding the brand. You might want to make it more apparent that the site is under new management with the new manifesto very clearly spelled out from page 1. Sorry if I came off really harshly, I actually didn't know the site changed ownership and I've had projects hosted there (now defunct) for well over a decade. I really hope you are successful in your efforts, but the brand took massive damage so I'm still skeptical at your odds to be frank. But don't let that deter you -- ultimately I'm still just another jerk on the internet with his own opinion. ;)

Re:Too little, too late

[Kjella]

It's more like you took over a franchise restaurant but it still has the same name and the same product it's just "under new management". For many people it's still "the place that was full of rat turds", to be honest I don't quite understand the value of tarnished brands but it seems the whole marketing world disagrees with my valuation so maybe they're on to something. I'd probably say okay let's take the system, users, code and all that but let's make a brand do-over, this is not SourceForge anymore it's a new service run by different people and we'll treat you better. I mean kudos for wanting to "restore" the SourceForge name to honor but I'm not sure it was worth saving. But hey it's your money I'm just playing armchair quarterback here.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

Thanks for the feedback

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

Yeah I understand the reactions are natural. Just focused on doing right by the million daily users. If more people want to join then that's awesome.

Re:Too little, too late

[LesFerg]

The previous owners only interfered with a small selection of projects. Other project owners were given the option of including a revenue generator in their installers.
My app was never altered by anybody other than myself, and my users were still happy to keep downloading and using it.
I have had a good 10 years of hosting and support, and the new owners are very determined to move on from all the silliness and mistakes of the past, I just wish all the whiners would get over it too.

Re:Too little, too late

[LesFerg]

I haven't updated my project for 3 years, but I do intend to fix a few bugs sometime soon... any minute now I may start coding...
Really, if any user actually found the main bug I am concerned with and reported it, I would be writing the fix immediately, since the users are all happy with the features they use, it is on the long-term plans to get around to it. Honest. : )

Re:Too little, too late

[LesFerg]

Hey, SF was my reason for learning to use GIT. A number of years ago I migrated my project from their original version control system to GIT, and whenever a user of my app contacts me about an extra feature I get into that code, thank myself for making useful code comments, and add that feature in. It doesn't have to get weekly updates to be a live project, and SF suits me just fine.

Re:Too little, too late

[LesFerg]

Can anybody state exactly how many download/installers actually had the bundled adware?
As far as I can tell it was only a few projects, and those were projects which appeared to have been abandoned by their original creators.
All the software which was still under active management and being updated was adware free, unless the project owner decided to include it.

Am I wrong in my recollections?

The crap decisions by the management of the day were actually quite small, the massive over-reaction by the citizens of the net were much larger than the original problem. I also suspect that, compared to today's level of advertising encroachment on everybody's internet and social-media feeding holes, the weak attempt at adding a revenue generator to the freely hosted software back then would be considered a very minor annoyance. In fact new young users of the internet probably have to clue what all the bitching is about.

Re:Too little, too late

[LesFerg]

What was wrong with the modification dates?
My project has always shown how slow and lazy I am with software updates, with great precision.
WTF are you talking about?

Re:Too little, too late

[AmiMoJo]

Thanks for your efforts, I hope they pay off. Sourceforge was a great site for many years, and when I next have something to release I'll give it a try.

It sounds like you are listening and want to make it better. GitHub isn't very responsive, e.g. people have been asking for project folders for years. Try managing 30+ repos in a single list.

Re:Too little, too late

[AmiMoJo]

Can I make a request? Could you do a Q/A about Slashdot and your plans for it? Moderation in particular is in need of attention.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

Yes. Agreed.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

Thanks. Doing our best.

Re:Too little, too late

[AmiMoJo]

Thanks, it's really appreciated.

Slashdot means a lot to me, and I'm sure many others. We have been here a long time, and while we complain sometimes we do appreciate what you did for the community. More than that, you seem to get what Slashdot is about.

The only other thing I'd like to mention is the right hand side ads. I don't mind the ads per se, but that one makes the page really narrow when viewing on mobile.

Re:Too little, too late

[whipslash]

I feel you. We'll address it soon

Re:Too little, too late

[AmiMoJo]

Thanks. I really can't say that enough... The site might have died under Dice.

Is it an (attempted) EEE?

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

There is a simple test to decide if "feature" is part of Embrace, Extend and (try to) Extinguish strategy:

Q1 : Does it have an import feature? answer= A1

Q2: Does it have an export feature? answer= A2

if (A1 && !A2) {

return "yes, it is an EEE";

}

Still hosting Malware despite pledge

[Kobun]

Giving projects a workaround to install Malware means Sourceforge continues to be blocked on the networks I control. If you haven't seen it, the workaround is in allowing a project to use an installer that downloads additional code during the installation process. Sourceforge has opted to put tiny yellow text next to the download button with innocuous sounding language. I can only assume that Sourceforge has decided to continue hosting these projects despite knowing that they are dangerous due to either financial concerns or a lack of care.

For example: https://sourceforge.net/projec...

Re: Still hosting Malware despite pledge

[Kobun]

Parent and GP: Whipslash gave a similar answer a bit further up, to be seen here: https://developers.slashdot.or...

This doesn't sit well with me, since (again) it appears that the decision has been made to ignore the Malware linked but not directly hosted on Sourceforge. Of course network admins are going to keep blocking Sourceforge - it's not safe yet.

Re: Still hosting Malware despite pledge

[Dogers]

the decision has been made to ignore the Malware linked but not directly hosted on Sourceforge

So you guys block Google too?

Re: Still hosting Malware despite pledge

[Kobun]

No. Your point? Certainly I could have been more precise, but did you honestly not glean my meaning?

For the pedants in the room: Sourceforge hosting installers which then download additional malicious code from elsewhere cannot reasonably claim that their site is safe.

Re:Still hosting Malware despite pledge

[LesFerg]

Are you implying that GITHUB has a QA team which vets every project and every download on their site?

I usually check around for the reputation of any software I am considering installing, if there is something abusive on any open source site, I would expect to find discussions of that someplace.

Re:Still hosting Malware despite pledge

[Kobun]

Nope, not at all. That seems like an absurd conclusion to jump to from what I wrote.

SourceForge is simply lumped in with all of the other "free" download sites on the internet, as is befitting the risk profile they present.

not even at gunpoint

[nimbius]

would i use sourceforge. These are the guys who decided to bundle Gimp with adware under the guise that it was "abandoned" and so that somehow made it okay.

Re:not even at gunpoint

[whipslash]

The old ownership did that and it sucked. That's why I bought SourceForge and removed all the adware.

Re:not even at gunpoint

[nimbius]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... confirmed! Logan I'm sorry for the judgement. This decision should have gotten much, much more press than it has. Sourceforge is back!! :D

Re:not even at gunpoint

[whipslash]

Thanks!

Re:not even at gunpoint

[datavirtue]

Yeah. You don't want all that registry bloat slowing down the malware.

Re:But they so skeevy

[whipslash]

It's very much end-user focused: provides an intuitive download interface for non-developers, reviews, discovery tools etc. Developers also get detailed download statistics, mailing lists, and more. It's not really a zero-sum game. You can use GH primarily but use the GitHub Sync tool to take advantage of both platforms. There's a good comment from Reddit (u/badsectoracula) I just came across that put it well:

There is one thing that SourceForge does that basically no other site does: it puts a focus on the user side of things. GitHub, GitLab, Gitwhatever, BitBucket, etc focus too much on the developer side to the detriment of the users.

It is a bit hard to explain what i mean, but to take a look check this SF project: right at the top you have a big fat green "Download" button, rating from other users with reviews, number of downloads (so you can judge its popularity), a status indicator (beta here), ways to share it with others and even get notifications when the developer makes any updates. And that is at the "header". Right below you have link for the project's files (downloads, what the user cares about, not a VCS view), support, tickets and even a discussion forum with categories (i really dislike how in GitHub people use the bug tracker as a forum).

Other projects have mailing lists, news, etc. For example in 7zip's project page you get news and a series of screenshots.

As a user you also get to see the license of the project, the supported OSes and the category it is in - after all a particular project might not fit exactly what you need, but other projects in that category might be better choices.

And yes, of course, there is also the code tab where you can browse the repository, but unlike practically every other project hosting site, SourceForge does not impose any specific VCS nor is designed around it. Hell, if you want (and many projects on the site do exactly that) you can just provide source code releases and not use a VCS - or use another site to host the VCS.

Honestly, the amount of information and user focus that SourceForge has is beyond competition. And sadly it seems the vast majority of developers do not really care about their users, because not only SF has lost its popularity (which is understandable considering the actions from their previous owners) but recently i was looking for some sort of "sourceforge-like" software i could install in my own VPS to put my projects and there was nothing. I could find tons of GitHub wannabe clones in every fad language made the last few years (always tied to a single VCS - usually Git - of course) but none that had something as simple as a "Downloads" area.

The closest i've found is CodingTeam, a French "forge" written in PHP. It is actually quite nice (and if i'm honest i like how it looks better than the new "let's quadruple the size of all the things" SourceForge theme) and even has some features i haven't seen in other similar sites like support for translations. But if you look around you'd find pretty much the entire Internet ignoring it - i've only found a single mention on Reddit from 7 years ago that went ignored and no word about it on Hacker News or any other place where programmers meet.

Which, IMO, sucks because more often than not as a user i do not really care about the repository of a project - i care about releases, documentation, discussions, support and all that stuff.

Fully-synced repositories would be nice

[CustomSolvers2]

As a way to improve visibility and minimise the GitHub power, setting up mirrored repositories in sites like SourceForge sounds good to me. In fact, I did try to do something like that about 1 year ago, but the syncing wasn't working as expected. The part of easily importing all the information from GitHub was fine, but the part of SourceForge automatically updating any modification there wasn't. Without that working properly, there was no point in having the repositories duplicated and I deleted my SourceForge account.

After a quick look now, they seem to have done just some aesthetical modifications, although the pages seem to load a bit slower. The GitHub sync information doesn't include any express mention to the aforementioned issue of keeping automatically updating the repositories. I might give them another shot at some point, but I would use SourceForge only if that functionality is implemented. Actually, I think that they should better put their main focus on these lines of accepting that, for the time being, they are a secondary player with a good visibility what potentially makes them an excellent GitHub mirror/backup alternative.

Re:Fully-synced repositories would be nice

[whipslash]

Right now it's just releases that are updated automatically but full repositories is coming soon too

Re:Fully-synced repositories would be nice

[CustomSolvers2]

Good to know. I will mirror my main GitHub repositories as soon as this functionality is implemented.

Re:Fully-synced repositories would be nice

[whipslash]

Awesome to hear

Re:But they so skeevy

[Lunix Nutcase]

>>Sourceforge
>>Intuitive interface

Right...

Re:GUIs are for millenials and other various trash

[Doctor Memory]

Oooh, look at Mr. Fancy-Pants here with his IBM 360 and his punched cards! In my day, we did partial differential equations by sticking wires in a plug board and mounting it on our 402 tabulator. By the time we got back from debugging the fire we cooked our dinosaur meat on, we had our answer!

Re:But they so skeevy

[whipslash]

For non developers the interface is intuitive. Try telling a non-developer to download something from GitHub and SourceForge and see which one they find easier.

Re:a good way to get a virus in your build

[whipslash]

DICE injected adware. We had nothing to do with that and removed it immediately after buying SourceForge.

Re:But they so skeevy

[blackorzar]

whipslash have you thought on including some monetization options for the developers in SourceForge?
Some ideas:
1. An end user wants a new feature in a project in SourceForge. If they could send the request to the developer via SourceForge and end user and developer be able to arrange a price paid (SF charging a fee/percent for the service) would be great!
2. Paid Support plans. Even simple support plans out of the box would be interesting: the developer offers to be in a SourceForge chat room each Friday from 5 pm to 7 pm for their paid support subscribers. SF charges a fee/percent.
3. Core project model. Be able to offer in SourceForge two versions: a) their Official (paid) version with the classic year updates included and yearly renewals; and b) their in-develpement/unstable/core (unpaid) version. SF charges a fee/percent for the official version.

It is risky but i think SF has still a good position to try something like this. If you can help to have sustainable opensource projects where the developers can get economical retribution from them it will be a game changer.

Re:But they so skeevy

[whipslash]

These are great thank you. We do have these or variations of these on the roadmap.

good start but too many ads on project pages

[THE_WELL_HUNG_OYSTER]

It's a great start... but why so many ads? Take a look at any project page, for example: https://sourceforge.net/projects/squirrel-sql/. come on, does it really need ads on the top, side, middle, AND bottom? That just makes the site look spammy.

Re:good start but too many ads on project pages

[Dogers]

I don't see any ads on that page, even with uBlock turned off..??

Re:good start but too many ads on project pages

[THE_WELL_HUNG_OYSTER]

I don't even know what to say to you. maybe "open your eyes" :) Maybe you have a hard time differentiating between real content and advertisements?

Re:good start but too many ads on project pages

[LesFerg]

I don't see ads there either. Turned of adblock and refreshed the page. There is a small list of recommended projects on the right.
Is your browser infected maybe? Do you have third-party toolbars or anything like that?

Re:But they so skeevy

[datavirtue]

Developers. Developers! Developers!!!

All end-users need is a landing page and a gigantic download link....that they trust. Cross-platform is exploding. Soon, all applications will be obtained through app stores. Not because people want app stores but because they fear running uncurated binaries and none of the powers that control the OS and application runtimes of the near future have any interest in letting people drop binaries on their machine. Installing applications by hand or via wizard-based installer are coming to an end. It is an old paradigm.

Uphill both ways, plains trucker.

[fyngyrz]

I stacked rocks. If someone didn't like the answers I came up with, I threw rocks. This was the beginning of true multipurpose computing.

Re:Uphill both ways, plains trucker.

[LesFerg]

You had rocks? All we had was mammoth turds. If you pressed to hard in an addition, the results would get OR'ed together and it was hell debugging them once the flies found us.

Re:a good way to get a virus in your build

[whipslash]

We're not gonna please everyone and that's ok. We're just focused on improving SourceForge and thats enough for us.

Re:Still dominated by irrelevant adspew

[whipslash]

Zero people from the team that made those bad decisions are with our company. We removed the adware literally the day after we acquired SourceForge. It's been over 2 years now. We're not gonna win everyone back but that's ok.

Re:GUIs are for millenials and other various trash

[reboot246]

IBM was around 360 years ago?!? And how old are you anyway?

Sorry, but that's the way I read it at first glance. :)

Unforgiven

[epine]

I don't know of anyone who has forgiven them for injecting adware into downloads.

The Legions of Undying Rancour spawned by SourceForge go a lot further back than that.

SourceForge drifting (2001) by Loic Dachary

But when I read the details of their copyright assignment, I saw major problems. I was asked to assign copyright of my work that "is, or may in the future be, utilised in the SourceForge collaborative software development platform". The assignment was not limited to my contribution to the SourceForge code, it potentially covered all my past and future work if it was of some interest to SourceForge.

He tries to help them refine this, and here is what he receives for his efforts:

By signing this agreement, you, the undersigned, hereby assign to VA Linux all right, title and interest in and to the software code described below, and all copyright, patent, proprietary information, trade secret, and other intellectual property rights therein. You also agree to take all actions and sign all documents (such as copyright assignments or registrations) reasonably requested by VA Linux to evidence and record the above assignments.

What do they offer in return for this sweeping, blanket assignment? To enforce the GPL? No. Not a sweet thing.

Re:Still dominated by irrelevant adspew

[LesFerg]

I cannot find advertising on the site like you describe it.
Do you use one of those dubious ISP services that inject advertising into web content?