Talk:SourceForge: Difference between revisions
Assess remaining blank assessment |
|||
(24 intermediate revisions by 17 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Talk header}} |
{{Talk header}} |
||
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|1= |
|||
{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1= |
|||
{{WikiProject |
{{WikiProject Computing |importance=mid |free-software=yes |free-software-importance=High |software=yes }} |
||
{{WikiProject Internet |
{{WikiProject Internet |importance=Mid}} |
||
{{WikiProject Law |
{{WikiProject Law |importance=Low}} |
||
{{WikiProject Websites}} |
{{WikiProject Websites |importance=Mid}} |
||
{{WikiProject Politics}} |
{{WikiProject Politics |importance=Low}} |
||
}} |
}} |
||
== |
== Current Status == |
||
I just checked, and it seems that sourceforge.net is online, and fully functional. I think the Current Status section should either be removed, or updated to reflect the site's current online status. [[User:Darkinin|Darkinin]] ([[User talk:Darkinin|talk]]) 01:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
|||
Hi, browsing wikipedia, I noticed the launch year of Sourceforge.net is a ? in the article. http://linux.omnipotent.net/article.php?article_id=3649 (a republished linux.com article) mentions Coldstorage.org, which became Sourceforge.net and was referred back to by [http://fusion94.org/blog/1999/11/17/sourceforge-launched/ a blog posting about the launch of Sourceforge.net], which would date the launch to late 1999. I hope this helps. |
|||
:Their own blog (http://sourceforge.net/blog) says that there are some major services not yet restored. I don't have a position on what the article should say, but "fully functional" is not correct. [[User:DMacks|DMacks]] ([[User talk:DMacks|talk]]) 03:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC) |
|||
[[User:128.214.9.63|128.214.9.63]] 14:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC) |
|||
::Several years later, SourceForge still displays:"''The sourceforge.net website is temporarily in static offline mode. Only a very limited set of project pages are available until the main website returns to service.''" [[User:Santamoly|Santamoly]] ([[User talk:Santamoly|talk]]) 06:21, 14 February 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== Can someone explain this? == |
|||
:::{{ping|Santamoly}} Sourceforge has been experiencing recent DDOS attacks and other problems, including a major outage for the past few days (starting February 27/28). This is a completely new problem and not, as you put it, "several years later" the same problem. This problem may however be related to a major hardware/power incident from September 2017 which fried a lot of hardware. Furthermore, Sourceforge was bought by a new owner (BizX) in January 2016 and has been executing a series of major policy, software, and hardware changes ever since. Read the following for more information: |
|||
:::* https://twitter.com/sfnet_ops/status/969743281922936832 |
|||
:::* http://www.i-programmer.info/news/136-open-source/9430-does-sourceforge-have-a-future.html |
|||
:::* https://opensource.com/business/16/3/when-selling-site-means-selling-community-part-2 |
|||
:::* https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4n3e1s/the_state_of_sourceforge_since_its_acquisition_in/ |
|||
:::* https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/27/faulty_data_center_takes_out_sourceforge/ |
|||
::: [[Special:Contributions/172.88.134.103|172.88.134.103]] ([[User talk:172.88.134.103|talk]]) 14:48, 4 March 2018 (UTC) |
|||
== External links modified == |
|||
I've cut this out, can anyone explain what the significant changes where? |
|||
Hello fellow Wikipedians, |
|||
<blockquote> |
|||
A controversy erupted amongst open-source developers in February [[2002]] when VA significantly modified the terms and conditions of use. A number of developers unsubscribed and moved their projects to other sites such as the [[GNU Savannah]] site. Many, however, felt unable to move because of their dependence upon certain features in SourceForge (notably the [[compile farm]]). |
|||
</blockquote> |
|||
I have just modified 2 external links on [[SourceForge]]. Please take a moment to review [[special:diff/813837636|my edit]]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes: |
|||
<small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Alex|Alex]] ([[User talk:Alex|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Alex|contribs]]) 08:08, 6 August 2002</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> |
|||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150603170625/http://ir.corp.sourceforge.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=82629&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1260642&highlight= to http://ir.corp.sourceforge.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=82629&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1260642&highlight= |
|||
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011203709/http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2119983/china-asta-la-vista-altavista to http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2119983/china-asta-la-vista-altavista |
|||
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs. |
|||
: According to Savannah, ''"The GForge project is a continuation of the SourceForge project, which '''was close-sourced by VA Linux in 2001'''."''[http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/gforge/] |
|||
: [[GForge]] itself (and [[Savane]] too) should probably have their own pages on Wikipedia, as I ''think'' the GForge name is used for both the proprietary and the Free versions. Interestingly, the only reference I can find to it on Wikipedia is at [[project management software]], which lists [http://gforge.org gforge.org] as proprietary. [[User:Ojw|Ojw]] 18:41, 18 July 2005 (UTC) |
|||
{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}} |
|||
== List of Projects hosted on SourceForge == |
|||
Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 14:11, 5 December 2017 (UTC) |
|||
How about this sort of a list. Might be kind of interesting. Or does this sort of list in fact already exist? <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Hexii|Hexii]] ([[User talk:Hexii|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Hexii|contribs]]) 17:03, 2 August 2004</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> |
|||
== Logo == |
|||
: Current statistics from SourceForge: |
|||
:* Registered Projects: 100,955 |
|||
:* Registered Users: 1,083,958 |
|||
: I believe this list would be too large to be practical. There are also literally more than 100 clones of Tetris alone. SourceForge front page does give lists of most active and most downloaded projects but these vary over time.[[User:85.164.107.7|85.164.107.7]] 17:52, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC) |
|||
SourceForge's logo has apparently changed. The logo here is outdated. [[User:TheDaJakester|TheDaJakester'']]<sup>[[Talk]]</sup> 20:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC) |
|||
:: According to [http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=sourceforge.net+site%3Aen.wikipedia.org Google], we have about 372 wikipedia pages about sourceforge projects -- I was just thinking of a category for them, and came here to see if someone had already tried. |
|||
:: Of course, each of those programs will be in about 20 categories already: free software, windows software, mac software, web browsers, programs released in 1996, etc... [[User:Ojw|Ojw]] 18:31, 18 July 2005 (UTC) |
|||
== Irrelevant jargon == |
|||
: Instead we should just include a section on the SourceForge project of the month awards and list those projects. --[[User:LaFuchs|LaFuchs]] ([[User talk:LaFuchs|talk]]) 02:51, 4 January 2014 (UTC) |
|||
This article is a disaster. There's even an entire section of, from what I can see, specialist technobabble seemingly irrelevant to the rest of the article. What is this, why is it included, and what does it mean? |
|||
== SourceForge dead? == |
|||
: Simplifying a little, the SPF record for a domain is intended to identify those public IP addresses which are permitted to send mail for a domain. |
|||
: As at August 2018 the SPF DNS TXT record for 'sourceforge.net' redirects to that for '_spf.sourceforge.net' which is |
|||
Is anyone else getting only a banner ad when going to [http://sf.net sf.net]? I am using Firefox 1.0.6 on Windows XP SP2. --[[User:Pile0nades|pile0nades]]<sup>[[User_talk:Pile0nades|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Pile0nades|contribs]]</sup> 08:16, 2 September 2005 (UTC) |
|||
: "v=spf1 ip4:172.16.0.0/12 ip4:216.105.38.0/26 -all" |
|||
: Looks like invalid HTML rather than a dead website. W3C [http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fsourceforge.net%2F] lists hundreds of errors with the page, though it's just started working again, so maybe there was a particular banner ad which broke it... <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Ojw|Ojw]] ([[User talk:Ojw|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Ojw|contribs]]) 18:48, 2 September 2005</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> |
|||
: The CIDR block 172.16.0.0/12 is reserved by IANA in RFC1918 for local private use, and thus has no place in any SPF record. |
|||
== Project activity == |
|||
[[User:Oecology|Oecology]] ([[User talk:Oecology|talk]]) <!--Template:Undated--><small class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|undated]] comment added 09:20, 31 August 2018 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
What does the SourceForge "project activity" (most of the time around 99.xx percent for many projects) mean? --[[User:Abdull|Abdull]] 21:40, 6 May 2006 (UTC) |
|||
:The formula is [http://alexandria.wiki.sourceforge.net/Statistics#tocStatistics here]. Further down the page it says: ''The activity percentile for a project is the percentile of that project (0-100%) against all other projects that had a non-zero result for ranking.'' <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/87.162.56.49|87.162.56.49]] ([[User talk:87.162.56.49|talk]]) 11:17, 22 September 2008 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion == |
|||
::The alexandria wiki URL took me to a different page, without that information. For classic SourceForge, [http://sourceforge.net/p/forge/documentation/Project%20Statistics/ this page has Project Activity ranking criteria]. It is reasonably up to date, last revision was December 2012. --[[User:FeralOink|FeralOink]] ([[User talk:FeralOink|talk]]) 08:19, 28 July 2013 (UTC) |
|||
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: |
|||
* [[commons:File:SourceForge Homepage.png|SourceForge Homepage.png]]<!-- COMMONSBOT: discussion | 2022-05-26T04:36:27.359578 | SourceForge Homepage.png --> |
|||
Participate in the deletion discussion at the [[commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:SourceForge Homepage.png|nomination page]]. —[[User:Community Tech bot|Community Tech bot]] ([[User talk:Community Tech bot|talk]]) 04:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion == |
|||
== TfD nomination of Template:Sourceforgeproject == |
|||
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: |
|||
* [[commons:File:SourceForge Homepage.png|SourceForge Homepage.png]]<!-- COMMONSBOT: speedy | 2022-07-13T08:06:50.939173 | SourceForge Homepage.png --> |
|||
[[Template:Sourceforgeproject]] has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at [[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Sourceforgeproject|the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page]]. Thank you.<!-- Tfdnotice --> [[User:Kusma|Kusma]] [[User_talk:Kusma|(討論)]] 13:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC) |
|||
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —[[User:Community Tech bot|Community Tech bot]] ([[User talk:Community Tech bot|talk]]) 08:06, 13 July 2022 (UTC) |
|||
== Infobox == |
|||
{{Infobox Website |
|||
| name = SourceForge |
|||
| favicon = |
|||
| logo = <!--[[Image:NonFreeImageRemoved.svg !-- Sourceforge.net_logo.png --|Sourceforge.net logo]]--> |
|||
| screenshot = |
|||
| caption = |
|||
| url = http://www.sourceforge.net |
|||
| commercial = |
|||
| type = Software |
|||
| registration = Optional |
|||
| owner = [[Open Source Technology Group]] ? Va software? |
|||
| author = |
|||
| launch date = |
|||
| current status = |
|||
| revenue = |
|||
}} |
|||
== Why was it banned in China? == |
|||
Everything is in the title --[[User:SamiKaero|SamiKaero]] 21:00, 21 November 2006 (UTC) |
|||
== Split == |
|||
I've split this from [[SourceForge]] and moved the talk in here. [[User:Thumperward|Chris Cunningham]] 20:23, 13 March 2007 (UTC) |
|||
== Move proposal == |
|||
I'm proposing redirecting [[SourceForge]] to [[SourceForge.net]]; [[Talk:SourceForge#Requested move|see here]] for discussion and comments. [[User:Andareed|Andareed]] ([[User talk:Andareed|talk]]) 03:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== perpetual proprietary license == |
|||
From the article: "By uploading code to SourceForge.net, you grant SourceForge a perpetual proprietary license." |
|||
:Has SourceForge made use of this clause? What are the implications?--[[User:Dbolton|Dbolton]] ([[User talk:Dbolton|talk]]) 19:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::This is part of the SourceForge terms of use and it's not real criticism. If you don't want to give SourceForge a perpetual license, don't put your stuff on it. --[[Special:Contributions/76.121.174.183|76.121.174.183]] ([[User talk:76.121.174.183|talk]]) 20:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:::The criticism header was added recently. I agree that it is not criticism. I am restoring the content without the header (as it used to be for a long time). I think the sentence is still worthy of inclusion in the article.--[[User:Dbolton|Dbolton]] ([[User talk:Dbolton|talk]]) 22:58, 22 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
::::Can it be sure that this is not just legal talk? Further on section 8; 'LICENSING AND OTHER TERMS APPLYING TO CODE AND OTHER CONTENT POSTED ON SOURCEFORGE.NET'; of the [http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/sitelegal/wiki/Terms%20of%20Use terms of use], it says some things about the licenses themselves governing use. It seems that its license isn't very friendly to readers. ([http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7vmuh/by_submitting_you_grant_the_sourceforgecompany_a/ Here is an discussion]), for what it is worth.) [[Special:Contributions/82.169.255.79|82.169.255.79]] ([[User talk:82.169.255.79|talk]]) 22:18, 9 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::: Some more useful info on this issue can be found in a ticket on the SourceForge bug tracking system, where an user raised some questions about this licensing issue. As often happens no clear answer was done...: [[User:ALoopingIcon|ALoopingIcon]] ([[User talk:ALoopingIcon|talk]]) 22:47, 9 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::: http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=2076860&group_id=1&atid=200001 |
|||
::::::Maybe we should somehow make a note of sourceforges response, so both sides are somewhat represented? I don't really know how at this point. [[Special:Contributions/82.169.240.67|82.169.240.67]] ([[User talk:82.169.240.67|talk]]) 15:57, 12 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Thanks for the links on this issue. The current reference quotes sourceforge directly so it isn't like we aren't representing sourceforges' side. If Sourceforge has an official response or clarification then that would be worth linking to.--[[User:Dbolton|dbolton]] ([[User talk:Dbolton|talk]]) 18:24, 13 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:Hey, I'm wondering where the term "proprietary" comes from on this? Perpetual license, sure, but "proprietary" generally seems to refer to ownership, at least according to my dictionary. Even at the worst interpretation, it seems like you're granting SF a license to use your code however they see fit, but they don't own it. They even explicitly state that: "Except for Feedback ... COMPANY claims no ownership or control over any Content." See [http://apps.sourceforge.net/trac/sitelegal/wiki/Terms%20of%20Use current TOS]. Can we remove the "proprietary" claim? —<small>[[User:DragonHawk|DragonHawk]] ([[User talk:DragonHawk|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/DragonHawk|hist]])</small> 02:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC) |
|||
Hasn't their latest revision of the terms of use (October 19, 2009) eliminated this? The footnote in the article says it was retrieved 2008-05-13. [[Special:Contributions/98.247.240.243|98.247.240.243]] ([[User talk:98.247.240.243|talk]]) 08:15, 7 March 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Sourceforge.net has become braindamaged? == |
|||
When looking at project wiki pages at urls like: http://XXXX.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/XXXX |
|||
First wiki pages themselfes were missing. Now the images are missing. Why??, And when will they get things right? And why is nothing mention of this fact on the wikipedia page? [[User:Electron9|Electron9]] ([[User talk:Electron9|talk]]) 05:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Mismanagement''': ''As of 2008-10-06 all wiki documentation and possibly other functionality has been malfunctioning due an improperly managed service change. No offical reports.'' |
|||
:''Urls: http://*.sourceforge.net/wiki/index.php/*'' |
|||
::Wikipedia is not the place for bug reports or official news of server problems. I moved the above text from the article to the talk page for discussion--[[User:Dbolton|Dbolton]] ([[User talk:Dbolton|talk]]) 05:27, 8 October 2008 (UTC) |
|||
== Sourceforge logo missing == |
|||
Shouldn't there be the logo? |
|||
http://c.fsdn.com/sf/images//phoneix/splash.png <small><span class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Bulletxt|Bulletxt]] ([[User talk:Bulletxt|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Bulletxt|contribs]]) 18:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
: The logo is most likely non-free. --[[User:AVRS|AVRS]] ([[User talk:AVRS|talk]]) 16:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::I don't see a problem with that: fair use is allowed on wikipedia. The problem is closed-minded people... [[Special:Contributions/85.240.125.155|85.240.125.155]] ([[User talk:85.240.125.155|talk]]) 23:00, 15 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||
==Requested move== |
|||
Requesting move back to original name (a current redirect). The website is by far the entity most closely associated with the name "SourceForge". Since it is redirecting anyway, there is no point to tacking the TLD onto the article name. Previous move request, though not contested (or supported), did not provide any rationale for the current name. [[User:Ham Pastrami|Ham Pastrami]] ([[User talk:Ham Pastrami|talk]]) 20:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm going to [[WP:BOLD|be bold]] and just move this. Seems to be the trend, as with [[YouTube]] and [[Google]], to name two examples. [[User:Inferno, Lord of Penguins|Inferno, Lord of Penguins]] ([[User talk:Inferno, Lord of Penguins|talk]]) 22:04, 27 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::Once I get the redirect deleted, of course. [[User:Inferno, Lord of Penguins|Inferno, Lord of Penguins]] ([[User talk:Inferno, Lord of Penguins|talk]]) 22:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
:::Alright, looks like it's been moved already. [[User:Inferno, Lord of Penguins|Inferno, Lord of Penguins]] ([[User talk:Inferno, Lord of Penguins|talk]]) 15:32, 28 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
::::Not sure if it's proper to perform a move in the middle of an RM but since it was done, I moved the talk page to match. [[User:Ham Pastrami|Ham Pastrami]] ([[User talk:Ham Pastrami|talk]]) 02:39, 29 April 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== Merge Ohloh here == |
|||
Since Ohloh has been acquired by SourceForge, and it's article is a stub, I think it should be merged here; however, I feel it may not be the general opinion, so, what does everyone else have to say? I don't see the Ohloh article growing much independently, since the site has been announced to be somewhat merged with SourceForge. [[User:Hugo 87|HuGo_87]] ([[User talk:Hugo 87|talk]]) 01:52, 29 May 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*Well, why not leaving it evolve before taking quick decisions like that one? No one can know yet which will be the model SF and Ohloh will choose for the integration, and Ohloh features are announced to keep growing... I believe it is still useful to keep them unmerged --[[User:Samer.hc|Samer.hc]] ([[User talk:Samer.hc|talk]]) 09:26, 29 May 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*Ohloh is still a separate site with a different purpose. That would be like merging the Microsoft article with the MSN one; at least in my opinion it is. I'd say put a link from this article to Ohloh and give a brief mention of its acquisition. --'''[[User:ALK|<font color="#FF0000">A</font><font color="##3DD000">L</font><font color="#0000DD">K</font>]]''' ([[User_talk:ALK|Talk]]) 16:35, 7 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*[[Ohloh]] is still very much a separate site and merging these articles would make no sense at all. Other sites such as [[Freshmeat]] and [[Slashdot]] are also part of the SourceForge brand and Ohloh is no different. According to [http://www.ohloh.net/announcements/sourceforge_acquires_ohloh SourceForge Acquires Ohloh]: ''"Ohloh's services will continue to improve and expand - and gain a lot more exposure by being part of the SourceForge brand."'' [[User:Tothwolf|Tothwolf]] ([[User talk:Tothwolf|talk]]) 02:49, 18 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' I am also against merging the article at this stage as per the three comments above. --[[User:DarTar|DarTar]] ([[User talk:DarTar|talk]]) 17:58, 18 June 2009 (UTC) |
|||
== IP blocking the 'Axis of Evil' == |
|||
Is such reverse-censorship used on other similar projects? It might be interesting to add a connection, sources supported. --[[User:Leladax|Leladax]] ([[User talk:Leladax|talk]]) 15:56, 20 February 2010 (UTC) |
|||
== Hacking attempts on SourceForge.net == |
|||
Hello, I've added a section titled as above. please discuss if anything seems "MissSplled"! <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Missspelled|Missspelled]] ([[User talk:Missspelled|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Missspelled|contribs]]) 08:22, 29 January 2011 (UTC)</span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== Banned countries and controversy == |
|||
I understand that since about last year, if a project admin chooses that projects does not contain encryption, then it's possible to download this project from any country? <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/109.66.201.241|109.66.201.241]] ([[User talk:109.66.201.241|talk]]) 03:42, 31 August 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== History of SourceForge == |
|||
The history of SourceForge is missing. Including who owns and owned SourceForge. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/109.66.201.241|109.66.201.241]] ([[User talk:109.66.201.241|talk]]) 03:48, 31 August 2011 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
|||
== notability claim versus source == |
|||
The lede states "It was the first to offer that service for free to open source projects", however the given source does not state "first". It merely discusses in general terms the beginning of SourceForge. The startup date for this is "November 1999", a year and a half after the "open source" term was coined. [[User:Tedickey|TEDickey]] ([[User talk:Tedickey|talk]]) 15:46, 12 April 2012 (UTC) |
|||
:Still, the article implies that there was no comparable service at the time which might justify the statement that it was the first. Otherwise, we could change it to "one of the first" but I think we should probably leave it the way it is. Greetings --[[user:Hannes Röst|hroest]] 08:29, 28 May 2013 (UTC) |
|||
A specific quote (the article <em>is</em> short) would help support the "implies". This sentence "And the site would be – in the spirit of 1999 – totally free of charge." could easily be interpreted to contradict your statement. [[User:Tedickey|TEDickey]] ([[User talk:Tedickey|talk]]) 08:37, 28 May 2013 (UTC) |
|||
== Is SourceForge a Paas ? == |
|||
Or is it just a project management tool ? |
|||
I try to understand what a PaaS is. |
|||
PaaS = Platform as a Service |
|||
Thierry (FR), 12 june 2013 <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/193.253.100.123|193.253.100.123]] ([[User talk:193.253.100.123|talk]]) 05:39, 12 June 2013 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Latest revision as of 01:27, 20 June 2024
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the SourceForge article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Current Status
[edit]I just checked, and it seems that sourceforge.net is online, and fully functional. I think the Current Status section should either be removed, or updated to reflect the site's current online status. Darkinin (talk) 01:43, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Their own blog (http://sourceforge.net/blog) says that there are some major services not yet restored. I don't have a position on what the article should say, but "fully functional" is not correct. DMacks (talk) 03:23, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
- Several years later, SourceForge still displays:"The sourceforge.net website is temporarily in static offline mode. Only a very limited set of project pages are available until the main website returns to service." Santamoly (talk) 06:21, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
- @Santamoly: Sourceforge has been experiencing recent DDOS attacks and other problems, including a major outage for the past few days (starting February 27/28). This is a completely new problem and not, as you put it, "several years later" the same problem. This problem may however be related to a major hardware/power incident from September 2017 which fried a lot of hardware. Furthermore, Sourceforge was bought by a new owner (BizX) in January 2016 and has been executing a series of major policy, software, and hardware changes ever since. Read the following for more information:
- https://twitter.com/sfnet_ops/status/969743281922936832
- http://www.i-programmer.info/news/136-open-source/9430-does-sourceforge-have-a-future.html
- https://opensource.com/business/16/3/when-selling-site-means-selling-community-part-2
- https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4n3e1s/the_state_of_sourceforge_since_its_acquisition_in/
- https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/09/27/faulty_data_center_takes_out_sourceforge/
- 172.88.134.103 (talk) 14:48, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
- @Santamoly: Sourceforge has been experiencing recent DDOS attacks and other problems, including a major outage for the past few days (starting February 27/28). This is a completely new problem and not, as you put it, "several years later" the same problem. This problem may however be related to a major hardware/power incident from September 2017 which fried a lot of hardware. Furthermore, Sourceforge was bought by a new owner (BizX) in January 2016 and has been executing a series of major policy, software, and hardware changes ever since. Read the following for more information:
- Several years later, SourceForge still displays:"The sourceforge.net website is temporarily in static offline mode. Only a very limited set of project pages are available until the main website returns to service." Santamoly (talk) 06:21, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on SourceForge. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150603170625/http://ir.corp.sourceforge.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=82629&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1260642&highlight= to http://ir.corp.sourceforge.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=82629&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1260642&highlight=
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081011203709/http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2119983/china-asta-la-vista-altavista to http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2119983/china-asta-la-vista-altavista
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:11, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Logo
[edit]SourceForge's logo has apparently changed. The logo here is outdated. TheDaJakesterTalk 20:34, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Irrelevant jargon
[edit]This article is a disaster. There's even an entire section of, from what I can see, specialist technobabble seemingly irrelevant to the rest of the article. What is this, why is it included, and what does it mean?
- Simplifying a little, the SPF record for a domain is intended to identify those public IP addresses which are permitted to send mail for a domain.
- As at August 2018 the SPF DNS TXT record for 'sourceforge.net' redirects to that for '_spf.sourceforge.net' which is
- "v=spf1 ip4:172.16.0.0/12 ip4:216.105.38.0/26 -all"
- The CIDR block 172.16.0.0/12 is reserved by IANA in RFC1918 for local private use, and thus has no place in any SPF record.
Oecology (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:20, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:
Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
[edit]The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:
You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 08:06, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
- C-Class Computing articles
- Mid-importance Computing articles
- C-Class software articles
- Unknown-importance software articles
- C-Class software articles of Unknown-importance
- All Software articles
- C-Class Free and open-source software articles
- High-importance Free and open-source software articles
- C-Class Free and open-source software articles of High-importance
- All Free and open-source software articles
- All Computing articles
- C-Class Internet articles
- Mid-importance Internet articles
- WikiProject Internet articles
- C-Class law articles
- Low-importance law articles
- WikiProject Law articles
- C-Class Websites articles
- Mid-importance Websites articles
- C-Class Websites articles of Mid-importance
- Unknown-importance Computing articles
- All Websites articles
- C-Class politics articles
- Low-importance politics articles
- WikiProject Politics articles