Yeah, I think leaving Sourceforge was a necessity. The fallout from the Firefox move was too much. Among other things, UBlock was giving sourceforge links big warnings.
I'm wary of github, but if this ever changes, I'll move again.
Let me know if you had other concerns.
Thanks.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Yes, don't follow the crowd of SF haters.
Please make your own decisions in this case, instead of just following the crowd. You may not understand it, but your decision really does seem to be following the herd, rather than your own genuine investigative judgement.
SourceForge is a wonderful site, and is extremely expensive to host.
Although their 'methods' may not always be acceptable, they are certainly understandable. And really, to renounce such a great service which has provided so much hard work and resources, to just renounce it out of the blue as if it never existed, is pretty ungrateful.
This really seems more about drawing popularity to other sites, and you're just following their plan.
It's a cheap tactic where few people try to control the opinion of many others, and it's working.
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-28
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
And mozilla is also not the most wholesome company you would think it is. Understanding Mozilla really requires knowing some of the developers on a personal level, It also involves understanding of a bit of history.
Trust me, the relationship they have with the unix/gnu/linux community is not as deserved as one might think.
This loyalty some people have to mozilla is a little unjust.
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-28
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Hey, I've always felt that SourceForge got a lot of unnecessary hate. That said, I think that once SourceForge took over other projects, they finalized a change in direction. I've been giving them the benefit of the doubt even with the misleading "Download" advertisements as well as their opt-in adware bundling. After the above, I just don't feel comfortable with the idea of any entity -- SourceForge or otherwise -- deciding to take over this account at their discretion.
Also, I honestly think that we differ on whether their methods are acceptable. I understand the economic necessity of these methods, but still feel that they are morally wrong. We're talking about bundling adware / malware for unsuspecting users. As grateful as I am to SourceForge and their history for providing great services for free, I really feel that they've renounced those deeds in the present. Ultimately, being an adware / malware provider looks like the direction that SourceForge is heading.
Finally, I understand Mozilla has issues, but that's secondary to the point. It's not just Mozilla, but other projects, including GIMP and OpenOffice. SourceForge took over a broad swath of projects (I see they've since reversed). This has nothing to do with SourceForge vs Mozilla, but SourceForge versus the OSS community.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Idk, I really haven't looked into the matter. But it still just feels wrong going by gut instinct, and this is still more of a quality site to host on. But anyway, are these adware 'bundles' unavoidable? If there is no possible way to download the original software without the crapware, then yes, I can understand how this is bad. But surely there must be some way to receive the original unmodified software with little effort?
Are you positive this whole ordeal is not being blown out of proportion? Think about it please.
I still don't see any real fault in sourceforge, are you sure this isn't an irrational community decision?
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-30
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Really, you keep using the term "takeover", which is unrealistic and harsh, and more of a buzzword outspoken by community backlash.
And the OSS community can be annoyingly eccentric or childish at times, perhaps I'm judging the entire situation based of my opinion of them.
I apologize if I sound rude, but I assure you there is no hostile intention or feelings towards you. Or any feelings at all.
Some of the projects (especially firefox) are extremely difficult to host, it seems the mozilla organization has been sort of freeloading off SF to some extent. Maybe mozilla and SF had some type of agreement that you are unaware of, in which mozilla broke a few promises.
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-30
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
But anyway, are these adware 'bundles' unavoidable?
Honestly, I really feel that adware bundles are unacceptable. Whether or not they are unavoidable is secondary.
Are you positive this whole ordeal is not being blown out of proportion?
I tried to explain above that it's not just one incident. SourceForge has been moving towards monetization (misleading Download button advertisements; opt-in bundles). The Mozilla / GIMP / OpenOffice incident was the last straw.
Ultimately, this monetization direction is really contrary to my personal preference. Once Github goes the same way, I'll go packing again. Anyone can choose to keep company with whomever they wish, and I personally would rather not keep company with such profit-seeking entities.
Really, you keep using the term "takeover", which is unrealistic and harsh, and more of a buzzword outspoken by community backlash.
I'm not trying to use inflammatory rhetoric. If you like, you can substitute whatever word you wish. However, the fact remains that SourceForge took ownership of an account that Mozilla once administered (as well as GIMP, OpenOffice and many others). I think the action speaks much louder than whatever words are chosen.
Maybe mozilla and SF had some type of agreement that you are unaware of, in which mozilla broke a few promises.
Honestly, this is just speculation. If this was the case, then SourceForge should at least make some sort of public statement to the fact.
Finally, I appreciate your feedback, but it really is too late to change anything. XOWA is now mostly on github, and whatever remains will eventually move over. If circumstances change, I will certainly consider moving back, but considering recent history, it doesn't seem likely.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
I understand your decision is made, and that's totally fine. But I would like to just remind you to be more open minded with these matters.
I can reply to every one of your points, but I would rather just keep this short.
This ordeal really is about mozilla, it's the main driving force behind all this.
And sometimes you have to rely on gut instinct, not everything can be provided as hard evidence. You would be surprised how accurate "speculation" can be; how far it can go.
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-30
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
But I would like to just remind you to be more open minded with these matters.
Ok. I honestly thought I was being open-minded. However, for whatever it's worth, I have given a little more thought to the SourceForge side of things thanks to your efforts. It's not enough to get me to undo the move, but I would consider returning if SourceForge ever does an about-face on their monetization ways.
Thanks.
If you would like to refer to this comment somewhere else in this project, copy and paste the following link:
Despite this change in direction, it's still difficult for me to trust them. Their original action was too broad and wide-ranging. Again, if they reverse direction in future behavior, I will reconsider. But for now, their earlier action is too hard to forget.
Apparently, SourceForge's mysterious "sf-editor1" has also claimed ownership of a number of other accounts for open source and other software projects. The following are just a sampling of downloads now "brought to you by sf-editor1":
Most of the Apache Foundation's projects—including Allura, Derby, Directory Studio, the Apache HTTP server, Hadoop, OpenOffice, Solr, and Subversion;
The Mozilla Project's Firefox, Thunderbird, and FireFTP;
The Evolution and Open-Xchange mail clients;
The Drupal and WordPress content management systems;
The Eclipse, Aptana, Komodo, MonoDevelop, and NetBeans integrated development environments;
The VLC, Audacious, Banshee.fm, Helix, and Tomahawk media players;
The Reaver WPS Wi-Fi hacking tool;
and a host of games, utilities, and other applications.
The list includes popular programs that are not officially hosted anymore on Sourceforge (or never have been but were included in the Sourceforge open source mirror directory) but still available on the site as projects including VLC, Firefox, Thunderbird, Drupal, WordPress, Eclipse, Net Beans or Subversion.
In light of SourceForge aggressively taking ownership of other open-source projects, I've decided to move XOWA to github.com. I'll post one final release next Sunday here at SourceForge, but all future releases will be at https://github.com/gnosygnu/xowa/releases/. My apologies in advance for any confusion.
Last edit: gnosygnu 2016-04-01
Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-28
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-28
Yeah, I think leaving Sourceforge was a necessity. The fallout from the Firefox move was too much. Among other things, UBlock was giving sourceforge links big warnings.
I'm wary of github, but if this ever changes, I'll move again.
Let me know if you had other concerns.
Thanks.
Yes, don't follow the crowd of SF haters.
Please make your own decisions in this case, instead of just following the crowd. You may not understand it, but your decision really does seem to be following the herd, rather than your own genuine investigative judgement.
SourceForge is a wonderful site, and is extremely expensive to host.
Although their 'methods' may not always be acceptable, they are certainly understandable. And really, to renounce such a great service which has provided so much hard work and resources, to just renounce it out of the blue as if it never existed, is pretty ungrateful.
This really seems more about drawing popularity to other sites, and you're just following their plan.
It's a cheap tactic where few people try to control the opinion of many others, and it's working.
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-28
And mozilla is also not the most wholesome company you would think it is. Understanding Mozilla really requires knowing some of the developers on a personal level, It also involves understanding of a bit of history.
Trust me, the relationship they have with the unix/gnu/linux community is not as deserved as one might think.
This loyalty some people have to mozilla is a little unjust.
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-28
Hey, I've always felt that SourceForge got a lot of unnecessary hate. That said, I think that once SourceForge took over other projects, they finalized a change in direction. I've been giving them the benefit of the doubt even with the misleading "Download" advertisements as well as their opt-in adware bundling. After the above, I just don't feel comfortable with the idea of any entity -- SourceForge or otherwise -- deciding to take over this account at their discretion.
Also, I honestly think that we differ on whether their methods are acceptable. I understand the economic necessity of these methods, but still feel that they are morally wrong. We're talking about bundling adware / malware for unsuspecting users. As grateful as I am to SourceForge and their history for providing great services for free, I really feel that they've renounced those deeds in the present. Ultimately, being an adware / malware provider looks like the direction that SourceForge is heading.
Finally, I understand Mozilla has issues, but that's secondary to the point. It's not just Mozilla, but other projects, including GIMP and OpenOffice. SourceForge took over a broad swath of projects (I see they've since reversed). This has nothing to do with SourceForge vs Mozilla, but SourceForge versus the OSS community.
Idk, I really haven't looked into the matter. But it still just feels wrong going by gut instinct, and this is still more of a quality site to host on. But anyway, are these adware 'bundles' unavoidable? If there is no possible way to download the original software without the crapware, then yes, I can understand how this is bad. But surely there must be some way to receive the original unmodified software with little effort?
Are you positive this whole ordeal is not being blown out of proportion? Think about it please.
I still don't see any real fault in sourceforge, are you sure this isn't an irrational community decision?
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-30
Really, you keep using the term "takeover", which is unrealistic and harsh, and more of a buzzword outspoken by community backlash.
And the OSS community can be annoyingly eccentric or childish at times, perhaps I'm judging the entire situation based of my opinion of them.
I apologize if I sound rude, but I assure you there is no hostile intention or feelings towards you. Or any feelings at all.
Some of the projects (especially firefox) are extremely difficult to host, it seems the mozilla organization has been sort of freeloading off SF to some extent. Maybe mozilla and SF had some type of agreement that you are unaware of, in which mozilla broke a few promises.
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-30
Honestly, I really feel that adware bundles are unacceptable. Whether or not they are unavoidable is secondary.
I tried to explain above that it's not just one incident. SourceForge has been moving towards monetization (misleading Download button advertisements; opt-in bundles). The Mozilla / GIMP / OpenOffice incident was the last straw.
Ultimately, this monetization direction is really contrary to my personal preference. Once Github goes the same way, I'll go packing again. Anyone can choose to keep company with whomever they wish, and I personally would rather not keep company with such profit-seeking entities.
I'm not trying to use inflammatory rhetoric. If you like, you can substitute whatever word you wish. However, the fact remains that SourceForge took ownership of an account that Mozilla once administered (as well as GIMP, OpenOffice and many others). I think the action speaks much louder than whatever words are chosen.
Honestly, this is just speculation. If this was the case, then SourceForge should at least make some sort of public statement to the fact.
Finally, I appreciate your feedback, but it really is too late to change anything. XOWA is now mostly on github, and whatever remains will eventually move over. If circumstances change, I will certainly consider moving back, but considering recent history, it doesn't seem likely.
I understand your decision is made, and that's totally fine. But I would like to just remind you to be more open minded with these matters.
I can reply to every one of your points, but I would rather just keep this short.
This ordeal really is about mozilla, it's the main driving force behind all this.
And sometimes you have to rely on gut instinct, not everything can be provided as hard evidence. You would be surprised how accurate "speculation" can be; how far it can go.
Last edit: and0r 2015-06-30
Ok. I honestly thought I was being open-minded. However, for whatever it's worth, I have given a little more thought to the SourceForge side of things thanks to your efforts. It's not enough to get me to undo the move, but I would consider returning if SourceForge ever does an about-face on their monetization ways.
Thanks.
It's silly
Last edit: and0r 2015-07-02
Thank you for editing the earlier post.
I just want to clear up one possible misunderstanding. At the time, SourceForge took over 50+ projects. I list links and excerpts below.
Since then, they reduced that number from 50+ to about 5. You can see those 5 at http://sourceforge.net/u/sf-editor1/profile/
Despite this change in direction, it's still difficult for me to trust them. Their original action was too broad and wide-ranging. Again, if they reverse direction in future behavior, I will reconsider. But for now, their earlier action is too hard to forget.
Other links below.
Thanks.
Apparently, SourceForge's mysterious "sf-editor1" has also claimed ownership of a number of other accounts for open source and other software projects. The following are just a sampling of downloads now "brought to you by sf-editor1": Most of the Apache Foundation's projects—including Allura, Derby, Directory Studio, the Apache HTTP server, Hadoop, OpenOffice, Solr, and Subversion; The Mozilla Project's Firefox, Thunderbird, and FireFTP; The Evolution and Open-Xchange mail clients; The Drupal and WordPress content management systems; The Eclipse, Aptana, Komodo, MonoDevelop, and NetBeans integrated development environments; The VLC, Audacious, Banshee.fm, Helix, and Tomahawk media players; The Reaver WPS Wi-Fi hacking tool; and a host of games, utilities, and other applications.Forum links listing other projects:
Here are other projects who also left due to this move: