Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Knitter » 23 Aug 2013, 18:04

Hi,

I've been a user of sourceforge project hosting system for quite some time, but recent changes regarding advertising banners, and some malware/adware reports, and other policy changes are make me want to search for a new hosting solution for current of future projects. Guess things like this http://www.gluster.org/2013/08/how-far- ... as-fallen/ were just too much for me.

What I've used:
Sourceforge - was easier to setup projects, add several good tools and their system uptime was good for the projects I have, now I want to move away from it as fast as possible;
Berlios - used it before the all shutdown process that ended up not being a shutdown, software and tools provided are old and interface is a mess, would prefer not to use it again and will move any projects I still have there;
Github - proprietary system, though very easy to use and one of the best systems that provides a git central point, doesn't offer website hosting or databases unfortunately
Gitorious - tested it once, seems a bit dead or is am I wrong?
Bitbucket - same issues as github

So, what I would like to ask is what are you using that is not self hosted and what do you recommend? I would prefer a free software system but I don't see one that is not either old and unusable or that I trust to be around and not just treat to close like Berlios.
Knitter
 
Posts: 237
Joined: 03 Jul 2011, 22:52
Location: Portugal

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Evropi » 23 Aug 2013, 18:28

I agree with all your points.

I would suggest you look at 2 services.

First, Debian's Alioth. It's all free software (and support git), but the really big plus side of this is that it hosts MediaWiki for you and it has a very good issue tracker. The backend software is FusionForge, which is a fork of GForge which is what RubyForge and JavaForge run (both of which have now been eclipsed by GitHub).

Second, GitLab.com, which is unsurprisingly a hosted version of GitLab. This is an open source re-implementation of GitHub and uses much of the same toolchain. You should be immediately familiar with it if you have experience with GitHub. It has a very good UI, just like GitHub and Bitbucket do.

One thing all of these lack is community. The last recommendation is Google Code, which has seen a steady decrease of features over the years but remains a popular host. Another possible place to go is Microsoft's CodePlex, which is actually a very good service. The wiki is worse than GitHub's, but the issue tracker and VCS viewer are solid. They will also host files for you, much like SourceForge. Both CodePlex and Google Code are proprietary software.

GitHub is, for better or worse, the de facto platform for open source software development. With all of these options, you will get less exposure, either way you go about it. SourceForge still stinks though. The Red Eclipse project has been trying to move away for a while. Quinton recently secured hosting from tuxfamily.org.

That's my recommendations. The choice is up to you, developer!
You just wasted 3 seconds of your life reading this.
User avatar
Evropi
 
Posts: 385
Joined: 02 Sep 2012, 16:18

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby jcantero » 23 Aug 2013, 18:58

Comparison of open-source software hosting facilities in Wikipedia is a good starting point.

GNU Savannah is an alternative to SF, but beware of their strict policies:
Unlike SourceForge, Savannah's focus is for hosting free software projects and has very strict hosting policies, including a ban against the use of non-free formats (such as Macromedia Flash) to ensure that only free software is hosted.

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Savannah

Gitorius is not very used (mainly due to the popularity of GitHub) but I don't think it's diying. Anyone has any additional info about this?
jcantero
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 01 Jul 2013, 18:20

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Julius » 23 Aug 2013, 19:11

Tuxfamily also offers hosting for open-source projects.
User avatar
Julius
Community Moderator
 
Posts: 3297
Joined: 06 Dec 2009, 14:02

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Knitter » 23 Aug 2013, 19:23

I know about the wikipedia's links :), just wanted to read some user opinions ;)

At this point, GitHub offers a very good service, though I would prefer a free platform and except for bitbucket, most of the others offer tools that I don't want to use (Bazaar, CVS, SVN), outdated or limited versions of a platform (the old sourceforce platform code or one of the ports like GForge) or don't offer enough tools for what I want (no bug tracker, not file hosting). I also don't want to host anything in any of my own servers as I know that I might not be able to maintain them due to the costs involved.

So now it is a race between Github, Bitbucket or Gitorious.
Knitter
 
Posts: 237
Joined: 03 Jul 2011, 22:52
Location: Portugal

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby jcantero » 23 Aug 2013, 19:35

Knitter {l Wrote}:So now it is a race between Github, Bitbucket or Gitorious.

They are not exclusive. You can use the three as a copy/backup of your local git repository. That's one of the advantages for using a DVCS.
jcantero
 
Posts: 43
Joined: 01 Jul 2013, 18:20

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby amuzen » 23 Aug 2013, 21:17

Github apparently re-added support for binary releases lately so I guess that it would be at least a bit more complete replacement than before. The terms of service don't seem to explicitly prohibit you from releasing an installer that side-loads crapware either... :p

As for website hosting, in addition to the already mentioned options, you might be able to host your site in the cloud. I haven't tested it myself, but the free plan of OpenShift (open source) might be an option for a smaller project. Other, more well-known, commercial cloud hosting services would start from about $15/month.
User avatar
amuzen
LoS Moderator
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 05 Dec 2009, 02:49

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Evropi » 23 Aug 2013, 22:01

Knitter {l Wrote}:I know about the wikipedia's links :), just wanted to read some user opinions ;)

At this point, GitHub offers a very good service, though I would prefer a free platform and except for bitbucket, most of the others offer tools that I don't want to use (Bazaar, CVS, SVN), outdated or limited versions of a platform (the old sourceforce platform code or one of the ports like GForge) or don't offer enough tools for what I want (no bug tracker, not file hosting). I also don't want to host anything in any of my own servers as I know that I might not be able to maintain them due to the costs involved.

So now it is a race between Github, Bitbucket or Gitorious.

Just wondering, why did you cross out GitLab.com from the list?

Also, I don't believe having "tools you don't want to use" reduces the potency of a platform. Additionally, FusionForge is a GForge fork, not the other way around.

I think Gitorious is a pretty terrible service. They need to seriously think their user interface. The community, naturally, became dead beef from the moment most developers realised that setting up their own RedMine instance would provide a better experience than using Gitorious to host their code, despite the service being free of charge.

From my point of view, the only really competitive all-FOSS service (both Atlassian and GitHub Inc release lots of code as FOSS mind you) is GitLab.com. Please do not dismiss it so easily! It really is worth a look and it will only get better going forward. CodePlex is good too, supports file hosting for one.
You just wasted 3 seconds of your life reading this.
User avatar
Evropi
 
Posts: 385
Joined: 02 Sep 2012, 16:18

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Knitter » 23 Aug 2013, 22:33

Evropi {l Wrote}:Just wondering, why did you cross out GitLab.com from the list?

Still looking into it, but the "enterprise" vs open source model is not something I like in a product, I feel, and this is just an opinion, that it makes a product look weaker and loose value. And I'm always afraid the free version lags behind the enterprise version. Also, as far as I can tell, it doesn't offer releases nor pages for projects.

Evropi {l Wrote}:Also, I don't believe having "tools you don't want to use" reduces the potency of a platform.

I meant that they only offer tools that I don't want, not that they would offer more than I need. One example is Launchpad and their Bazaar system.

Evropi {l Wrote}:Additionally, FusionForge is a GForge fork, not the other way around.

Not following. GForge is a fork of SourceForge, or am I mistaken?

Evropi {l Wrote}:From my point of view, the only really competitive all-FOSS service (both Atlassian and GitHub Inc release lots of code as FOSS mind you) is GitLab.com. Please do not dismiss it so easily! It really is worth a look and it will only get better going forward. CodePlex is good too, supports file hosting for one.

I may move to their system after I evaluate it better. For now I'm moving any SVN based project I have to GIT and to GitHub, if I later find Gitlab.com to be good and a system to trust I'll move them as it will be a simple push :)

As for CodePlex I don't really like it as a user, and never managed to shake the "it's a Microsoft system" feeling, as good as it may be I just don't like it, nothing technical about it really.

jcantero {l Wrote}:They are not exclusive. You can use the three as a copy/backup of your local git repository. That's one of the advantages for using a DVCS.

It is hard enough to maintain all projects in one single platform, having to maintain several in parallel will just make some of them lag behind.
Knitter
 
Posts: 237
Joined: 03 Jul 2011, 22:52
Location: Portugal

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Knitter » 23 Aug 2013, 23:38

One thing against Gitlab, and that I understand not to be in their roadmap or interest, is that there is no public access whatsoever. You don't have a way for the project to be publicly accessible like you do in other hosting solutions. Perfectly understandable as their goal is to have a self hosted product for companies.
Knitter
 
Posts: 237
Joined: 03 Jul 2011, 22:52
Location: Portugal

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Evropi » 24 Aug 2013, 00:55

In fact there is public access on the hosted instance (GitLab.com). Just click the globe symbol (with an alt text of "Public Area") on the top right! :D

As for the hosted version on GitLab.com, it is currently at version 5.3 but that's only because it develops at breakneck pace. It will sooner or later be updated to 6.0, they are not withholding updates. Additionally, the features in the enterprise edition are needed by pretty much no-one other than enormous organisations and projects, Linux kernel tier. That's a pretty recent move by the way, and while I'm not too happy about it the end-user loses absolutely nothing whatsoever. They will continue to maintain the open source version of course and the codebase will be identical. They are only thinking of one feature to add to the EE version as it is, which is, I quote "[...] the ability to invite other groups to a group. This is something we think is relevant for larger organizations only.".

As for GForge and its 2009 fork FusionForge (what Alioth runs, it's much better IMO), it was originally a fork of SourceForge but that was way back in 2001. They share no code now, it's been (more or less) completely rewritten. But yeah, obviously it's not nearly as polished as some other services, especially UI-wise.
You just wasted 3 seconds of your life reading this.
User avatar
Evropi
 
Posts: 385
Joined: 02 Sep 2012, 16:18

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Knitter » 24 Aug 2013, 12:05

Really trying to give them a try but this is not easy :)

Public projects are only "public" to registered users, if you don't have an account you can't access the list of "public" projects, that defeats the idea of having a public project.
Just added my public key I created for GitLab but still can't do clones or checkouts due to key issues :)

And I really prefer their "merge" approach over github's "pull requests".
Knitter
 
Posts: 237
Joined: 03 Jul 2011, 22:52
Location: Portugal

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Julius » 27 Aug 2013, 16:13

http://www.gluster.org/2013/08/how-far- ... as-fallen/

I thought it was just people complaining, but this is pretty serious if true.
User avatar
Julius
Community Moderator
 
Posts: 3297
Joined: 06 Dec 2009, 14:02

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby amuzen » 27 Aug 2013, 17:33

Julius {l Wrote}:http://www.gluster.org/2013/08/how-far-the-once-mighty-sourceforge-has-fallen/

I thought it was just people complaining, but this is pretty serious if true.


One of the links in the comments of that article points into a more informative look into the issue, if you're interested.
User avatar
amuzen
LoS Moderator
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 05 Dec 2009, 02:49

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Evropi » 27 Aug 2013, 18:00

Julius {l Wrote}:http://www.gluster.org/2013/08/how-far-the-once-mighty-sourceforge-has-fallen/

I thought it was just people complaining, but this is pretty serious if true.

This article was in the OP. :P
You just wasted 3 seconds of your life reading this.
User avatar
Evropi
 
Posts: 385
Joined: 02 Sep 2012, 16:18

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Julius » 27 Aug 2013, 18:08

lol true :oops:
User avatar
Julius
Community Moderator
 
Posts: 3297
Joined: 06 Dec 2009, 14:02

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby charlie » 28 Aug 2013, 08:39

I think this article is borderline trolling. (No borderline about it. "The developer needs to specifically request it.")

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6262347

The article gets a few things very wrong. First off, there are no drive-by installers. It's an offer-based installer. Meaning that when you run it, you get a single offer of an additional product. Second, it's offering you either trialware (a trial version of a for-sale product that they hope you buy after trying) or adware (like an Ask.com toolbar to ad to your browser). The author of this blog post is either outright lying about it doing drive-by-installers and malware or is clueless about what the terminology actually means.

The last time this was posted on HN, I did a quick writeup on my understanding of it (reposted here):

"For the curious, this is an optional program at SourceForge being offered to developers as a way to monetize their work. The developer needs to specifically request it. SourceForge gets a cut, so does the developer. The installer is their first stab at this process and is using the bundling technology from Ask.com. As offer-based installers go, this one is about as good as it gets. It makes a single offer and has an Accept and Decline button with the user selecting whichever one they want (not a pre-checked box accepting the offer above a Next/Continue button). If accepted, the installer installs the offered software and it gets a standard entry in Windows' Add/Remove Programs that works as expected. If declined, the installer continues. The installer then downloads the originally-requested software.

The two issues with the current installer are that (1) it is served in place of the requested file with no indication that a substitution is made as the user downloads and (2) it requests admin rights before it starts downloading the software, which can be a security issue. Roberto (who posted the article) has stated that they are working on #1 in terms of the text shown on SourceForge as you select to download and download. As for #2, there may be some ways to rework the installer so this is not an issue. I'll mention it to him when I speak to him.

SourceForge has one other revenue-share program with developers where you place the SourceForge-branded download buttons on your own website that link to your downloads on SourceForge and you get a small cut of the ad revenue made from the download page.

If I recall correctly, SourceForge has been losing money for a few years now. Dice Holdings picked up SourceForge and Slashdot while Geek.com kept ThinkGeek.com, so they are now separate entities. These new experiments are attempts to get SourceForge to be self-sustaining/profitable. Ad revenue alone likely won't cut it.

Unfortunately, Google Code, Github and others don't offer the full breadth of services that SourceForge does for open source projects. Google Code, Github, and others have all ditched binary downloads, so SourceForge is one of the only providers to make binary downloads available to Windows and Mac user at no charge. This is why SourceForge is popular for real apps (FileZilla, Pidgin, PortableApps.com, etc) and Github is popular for components (node.js, jquery, rails, etc). The code zips available at other providers are of no use to end users.

As full disclosure, I run PortableApps.com, one of SourceForge's largest projects pushing quite a few TBs of downloads through their mirror network. We make use of the SF-branded download buttons revenue share program but do not make use of nor have any plans to use the "enhanced" installers. Everything I've discussed here is already publicly available, I just thought it would be handy to have in one place."

After that post, it was pointed out to me that Github has added in the ability to host binaries, but I would wager they wouldn't take kindly to the kind of bandwidth that the major SF projects like PortableApps.com push through. I've also been in touch with Roberto who made the mentioned post on SourceForge about some suggestions and options including doing an open source installer that the end-user/sysadmin can verify before installing instead of it being a downloader installer with the offer built in but not the app you want.
Free Gamer - it's the dogz
Vexi - web UI platform
User avatar
charlie
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2131
Joined: 02 Dec 2009, 11:56
Location: Manchester, UK

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Knitter » 28 Aug 2013, 10:06

I always read such articles as simply opinions that do not always reflect the truth or the intentions of the Sourceforge.net owners. Fact is, there is no other service that fully offers what Sourceforge.net services offer to the hosted projects, even with the Allura platform that some developers don't like, it is still the best when it comes to centralized features to support a project. But I have wished to move away from it given the changes in owners and that move, that was also announced in their blog and to project developers using the monthly e-mails, was what pushed me to move projects out. I support the fact that they need money, I just see the change and the way it is not made clear to users nor have some way for the users to simply opt-out as one more bad option.

But here is the problem, I find no other hosting system that offers what SF.net does without charge. I use the paid services of Github.com, that are exactly the same as the free accounts except for the private repositories, it is a fantastic system for code sharing and to see some more interest in projects, but it lacks almost everything SF.net does. Other free software hosting systems are old or unusable or have rules I don't want to comply with (case of GPL only projects).

So, at this point, though I have moved some of the code to Github.com, given how easy it is for me to maintain the code there and later move it out with their APIs if necessary, I'm still searching for an alternative that doesn't imply hosting all the tools myself.

Thank for all the answers by the way :), some interesting systems and I actually found Gitlab to be a very exciting project.
Knitter
 
Posts: 237
Joined: 03 Jul 2011, 22:52
Location: Portugal

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby amuzen » 28 Aug 2013, 16:17

charlie {l Wrote}:I think this article is borderline trolling. (No borderline about it. "The developer needs to specifically request it.")


I'm pretty sure that the author of the article knew from the beginning that it's an opt-in feature (since he used the word bribe), but it probably isn't the point he's trying to make. It probably isn't the point either that the side-loading software is generally crap. Rather, I think that the actual points he's making are these:

  • Closed source software should not be promoted.
  • Open source software should not be monetized (or services provided that help doing it).
  • Criticizing SourceForce is trendy.

In my opinion, the biggest losers in this affair are actually people who were looking for ways to fund development. This would have actually been one of the few models that could have worked in practice if it weren't for the backlash. Too bad since it isn't particularly intrusive compared to other monetizing methods and Windows users are likely used to skipping the offers already since they're pretty common around there.
User avatar
amuzen
LoS Moderator
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 05 Dec 2009, 02:49

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby NaN » 28 Aug 2013, 16:37

amuzen {l Wrote}:
charlie {l Wrote}:I think this article is borderline trolling. (No borderline about it. "The developer needs to specifically request it.")


I'm pretty sure that the author of the article knew from the beginning that it's an opt-in feature (since he used the word bribe), but it probably isn't the point he's trying to make. It probably isn't the point either that the side-loading software is generally crap. Rather, I think that the actual points he's making are these:

  • Closed source software should not be promoted.
  • Open source software should not be monetized (or services provided that help doing it).
  • Criticizing SourceForce is trendy.

In my opinion, the biggest losers in this affair are actually people who were looking for ways to fund development. This would have actually been one of the few models that could have worked in practice if it weren't for the backlash. Too bad since it isn't particularly intrusive compared to other monetizing methods and Windows users are likely used to skipping the offers already since they're pretty common around there.


Imho the typical Windows user aka noob is not used to skipping adware, most of the time this crap gets installed, as they don't pay attention are overstrained by the installation process (especially when there might be a language barrier).

Also, at least from my pov, free (open source) software is seen as different (has better reputation) to the generic windows freeware, where adware is more tolerated. Now with SF help this view will change, for good or bad...
NaN
 
Posts: 151
Joined: 18 Jan 2010, 10:32

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Evropi » 28 Aug 2013, 19:09

I disagree, NaN. First, Windows has some 90% of the market, and I doubt they are largely noobs. Even noobs know how to read and know that an ad is an ad. So yeah, they will very often skip the adware. If they don't though, at least some coins will end up in your pocket.

Secondly, from anecdotal evidence... I used SourceForge as an alternative to Download.com to find new software for years. This was long before I knew what free/open source software even was. The 'reputation' you speak of is unknown to a lot of people outside IT.
Download.com had just made it harder to find freeware (no charge) so I went to another site that had lots of software you can download all for free. So your second argument does not hold water from my experience. It's all a question of money. That's why SourceForge became a popular method of distribution in the first place.
You just wasted 3 seconds of your life reading this.
User avatar
Evropi
 
Posts: 385
Joined: 02 Sep 2012, 16:18

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby mdwh » 31 Aug 2013, 11:16

I use launchpad for hosting binaries and source archives (and that other article is wrong to say only sourceforge does binary downloads). It doesn't support git (only bazaar) and seems to have less features, but it also works fine for me to have pages on multiple sites - so I use launchpad for the archives, but also have sourceforge pages to host git repositories, web page and forums.

Having said that, I don't mind them doing adware installers if it's opt-in by developers, and it also would be sad if sourceforge went under. But I also hate adware/crapware installers full stop - it's all very well saying it's only offered to the user, but it also tends to be on by default. It means inexperienced ppl clog their windows machines up with endless toolbars, and it makes installation too complex (why can't I have one click installation like say on android? because some developers might try to sneak in a damn toolbar that I have to untick, so I can never use the simple installer mode!) As NaN says, I agree it's sad to see open source contributing to crapware.

Just because windows has 90% share doesn't mean users aren't ignorant imo.
mdwh
 
Posts: 67
Joined: 13 Aug 2011, 01:53

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby NaN » 31 Aug 2013, 13:28

Evropi {l Wrote}:I disagree, NaN. First, Windows has some 90% of the market, and I doubt they are largely noobs. Even noobs know how to read and know that an ad is an ad. So yeah, they will very often skip the adware. If they don't though, at least some coins will end up in your pocket.

Secondly, from anecdotal evidence... I used SourceForge as an alternative to Download.com to find new software for years. This was long before I knew what free/open source software even was. The 'reputation' you speak of is unknown to a lot of people outside IT.
Download.com had just made it harder to find freeware (no charge) so I went to another site that had lots of software you can download all for free. So your second argument does not hold water from my experience. It's all a question of money. That's why SourceForge became a popular method of distribution in the first place.

Well, I can only talk from my personal experience. The majority of Windows machines I have to deal with in private (about a dozen, all age groups users) had adware installed at some point. I am then the IT guy educating about what adware is and advocating open source. I won't be able to recommend sourceforge now of course.
NaN
 
Posts: 151
Joined: 18 Jan 2010, 10:32

Re: Free alternatives to sourceforce?

Postby Sauer2 » 31 Aug 2013, 23:04

Evropi {l Wrote}:I disagree, NaN. First, Windows has some 90% of the market, and I doubt they are largely noobs. Even noobs know how to read and know that an ad is an ad. So yeah, they will very often skip the adware.

That's very optimistic. People have better things to do than to read stuff at all. It's not about noobs and/or lack of intelligence. Also, Windows and Mac OS are more often used for jobs, where computers are not a self purpose to make the money (like development and administration). Computers simply have nothing to do with those peoples job.

Check this out:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/uibook/fog0000000249.html (Chapter 6)

When I developed in-house software during my apprenticeship, I found this to turn out true.
User avatar
Sauer2
 
Posts: 430
Joined: 19 Jan 2010, 14:02

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest