

The story between VLC and Sourceforge - mafuyu
https://blog.l0cal.com/2015/06/02/what-happened-to-sourceforge/

======
frik
Interesting is that Sourceforge doesn't even host the downloads themself, but
just links to mirrors like HEANET. The mirrors should refuse to add any new
binaries from Sourceforge and we need a community driven website that
coordinates open source download binary mirrors (based on what SF uses at the
moment), and Archive.org/ArchiveTeam/etc should backup all SVN/CVS/etc
repositories on Sorceforge, and Google then should remove them from their
index or flag them as adware/scam. But there is a risk that lot's of valuable
source code of abandoned projects get lost that is still very valuable. So a
source code repo backup is important.

It's sad what has turned out of the former great Slashdot and Sourceforge
websites.

[Edit: fixed typo]

~~~
jbk
Which is why, for VLC, we contacted ourselves all the mirrors (+ quite a few
new ones), and built our own new mirroring system, that is faster (and more
reliable) than the SF one.

The mirrors had no problem with that, since we were already the biggest
bandwidth consumer, through SF.

Why do the mirrors offer this bandwidth? Well, it depends. Some are
universities, some need bandwidth up/down balance (because of interconnections
contracts), some are just nice, and some get paid to do it.

~~~
tokenizerrr
Paid by who?

------
jakobdabo
To me P2P is the obvious answer to the (especially free) software distribution
problem. Sign the binaries, and let the users help you. You can even run
Opentracker [1] on a cheap server for more independence. Ubuntu is doing this.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opentracker](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opentracker)

~~~
sdalfakj
P2P is a very difficult option for any non-geek who wants to install ("just do
it") the software.

~~~
userbinator
"very difficult"? Has the definition of "non-geek" changed in the last decade?

I know many people who had absolutely no trouble downloading various things -
including software - from all the P2P networks that flourished around 10 years
ago. Not only torrents, but eMule, Kazaa, Limewire, etc.

They also happened to easily infect themselves with various malware by doing
that, but I'd consider it more evidence of how "non-geek" they were.

(But all in all, despite the risks, I definitely prefer and miss that era of
open filesharing compared to the closed proprietary walled gardens that have
replaced it.)

------
shiggerino
Reminds me of when VersionTracker was bought by Cnet, shut down and redirected
to their scam site.

------
cactusface
I guess one of the problems with software that doesn't cost any money is that
it's hard to build a business around giving it away. It sounds obvious in
retrospect...

~~~
rdc12
From the linked [0] article, SourceForge was a perfectly viable bussiness
before this, if it will continue to be is another matter

"First of all, problems with SourceForge are older than some people might
expect. At some point in mid-2000s, SourceForge stopped evolving as fast as it
used to and focused on advertising-based revenue. This allowed them to go from
$6mln in 2006 to $23mln revenue in 2009. But it also alienated free software
developers due to poorer service quality. Various projects started moving
away."

[0][http://libregraphicsworld.org/blog/entry/anatomy-of-
sourcefo...](http://libregraphicsworld.org/blog/entry/anatomy-of-sourceforge-
gimp-controversy)

~~~
cactusface
If you need projects to attract downloaders, your source of income is
advertising to downloaders, and advertising to downloaders drives away
projects, then your business isn't perfectly viable, even if you make more
money for a time.

------
diceruinedsf
Sourceforge was great until Dice.com bought them. Things seem to have gone
downhill faster once
[https://www.linkedin.com/in/gkuchhal](https://www.linkedin.com/in/gkuchhal)
took over.

------
maaaats
Can't wait for Windows 10 and it's manager to make all these crapsites
obsolete.

~~~
frik
Chocolatey downloads Sourceforge binaries too:
[https://chocolatey.org/packages?q=sourceforge](https://chocolatey.org/packages?q=sourceforge)

And Microsoft won't curate nor provide a mirror for popular open source binary
downloads, right?

Sourceforge basically acts as a web interface for a dozens of open source
gratis mirrors. The mirrors allow Sourceforge to upload files, something that
should be revoked and transferred to a free software open source community
driven website.

~~~
arthurfm
> And Microsoft won't curate nor provide a mirror for popular open source
> binary downloads, right?

Developers will be able to upload regular desktop applications to the Windows
10 app store once they have converted them into the AppX format. I don't see
why open source Windows apps couldn't be hosted there.

------
sibbl
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9648616](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9648616)

~~~
maaaats
Please include the content of a link and why you think it's relevant.

In this case, I guess you want to point out a repost. But the other one got 6
points and 0 comments, so no other discussion with interesting comments to
link to.

