Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

GIMP, Citing Ad Policies, Moves to FTP Rather Than SourceForge Downloads

timothy posted about a year ago | from the voluntary-action dept.

The Gimp 336

Dangerous_Minds writes "GIMP, a free and open source alternative to image manipulation software like Photoshop, recently announced that it will no longer be distributing their program through SourceForge. Citing some of the ads as reasons, they say that the tipping point was 'the introduction of their own SourceForge Installer software, which bundles third-party offers with Free Software packages. We do not want to support this kind of behavior, and have thus decided to abandon SourceForge.' The policy changes were reported back in August by Gluster. GIMP is now distributing their software via their own FTP page instead." Note: SourceForge and Slashdot share a corporate parent.

cancel ×

336 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

BT (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362361)

Get a torrent up, many of us will seed for the community.

Re:BT (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362613)

I won't. Seeding is for loser. By download and not seeding, I not only don't pay back what I downloaded, but I fill someone else's seed quota, which hurts the swarm twice as much. It makes me feel so powerful.

Re:BT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362617)

Github, torrents, blogspot and some wiki provider might do the trick for them, if they want to escape source-forge.

Re:BT (5, Insightful)

ottothecow (600101) | about a year ago | (#45362733)

What's funny about this, is that part of what *sucks* about sourceforge's download pages is that they are littered with the same kind of ads that bittorrent sites have (I know, I know, they can host the torrent from their own tracker, not some pirate thing)

You get to a download page and there are ads that scream things like "DOWNLOAD NOW", "CLICK HERE TO INSTALL", etc.

Frequent/savvy users are able to figure this out, but when you tell your parents that they can get this free photo editor, they end up with the same damn crapware on their computer as they would have had if they just went ahead and tried to pirate photoshop. The same thing is true about Paint.Net's download page...on their page, I see two giant colorful "Download" buttons that are actually ads. The actual download link is a standard text link that says "Paint.NET v3.5.11" which takes you to another page that has another giant colorful "Download" button. On that page, the real download links look like fake links...the button says "Download Now DotPDN LLC" which doesn't sound at all like what you want.

Sourceforge isn't quite as bad...the ads aren't always there, and often they show up on the post download ad-page (the one that says "your download will start shortly" so there if you click them, you often end up with both the file you want *and* the crapware...leaving a 50/50 chance the user will get the right file.

I get why the pirate sites have these misleading ads (and it probably helps discourage people from software piracy since they try it, get some weird downloader and ad-toolbar instead of the software they were looking for, and then give up)...but when respectable free alternatives resort to the same shady ads? wtf?

Re:BT (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363027)

Um, can't the Gimp website put up a link to the torrent, then there'd be no ads.

Re:BT (5, Insightful)

CastrTroy (595695) | about a year ago | (#45363133)

Sourceforge has been on a download slide for a while. I tried downloading FileZilla, via Sourceforge, their primary link, and instead of just using the regular installer, it uses a special Sourceforge installer that tries to get you to install other junk you don't need on your computer. If you click around a bit on the FileZilla site, you can fine the link to the bare-bones install.

That kind of junk you talk about with Paint.Net is exactly why I don't use it.

I very much support GIMP in using their own FTP server. Of course, nothing stops them from hosting their own bittorent tracker though. Using bit-torrent doesn't mean the torrent files has to go through the pirate bay or other torrent sites.

Re: BT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363323)

I would just like to point out that some of us ARE parents!

Re:BT (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362759)

no thank you. official download sites are the only place to download application software.

Re:BT (2)

Anrego (830717) | about a year ago | (#45363287)

Suspect trolling, but I'll take the bait..

What?

If you worried about compromised downloads, just about every project that does this publishes the hashes on their official site. Easy to verify someone hasn't slipped something in there...

good move (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362365)

Haven't been impressed by SourceForge's recent policy of late- especially when I unclick the 'free software' offers attached to each download, yet they install anyway!

Re:good move (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362557)

Corporations, fucking everything for short-term profit .

Re: good move (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363253)

better than the alternative which is governments fucking everyone for nothing

Re:good move (4, Informative)

Nom du Keyboard (633989) | about a year ago | (#45363077)

Haven't been impressed by SourceForge's recent policy of late- especially when I unclick the 'free software' offers attached to each download, yet they install anyway!

Gee, that happens to you too? And here I was thinking that it was just Operator Error on my part.

Good (5, Insightful)

Sean (422) | about a year ago | (#45362369)

Sourceforge is garbage now.

Re:Good (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362489)

This is so true.

Re:Good (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362691)

Sadly, so is Slashdot. And for the same reasons.

Re:Good (5, Interesting)

sconeu (64226) | about a year ago | (#45362643)

Indeed. Good on the GIMP guys. Freaked me out the first time I got that on SF.

Re:Good (5, Insightful)

CitizenCain (1209428) | about a year ago | (#45362651)

How to destroy a powerful brand in 1 easy steps! (SourceForge, not GIMP.)

And yeah, while SourceForge has been declining for a while now, this is something entirely different from a slow decline... they may as well have taken it out back and shot it. Be quicker, and probably cheaper in the long run too.

Re:Good (5, Informative)

amicusNYCL (1538833) | about a year ago | (#45362685)

It's easy enough for me to click the Decline button instead of Accept (I'm one of the minority of users who reads things like that), but the installer doesn't even work that well. I was using Windows Remote Desktop to connect with a client's server, and the connection was pretty spotty. The server desktop was more like a slideshow. So instead of trying to edit code directly, I decided to upload all of their code to an FTP server, edit it locally, and then download the changes. So, I go to install Filezilla on the remote server. The entire SourceForge site is a mess. My remote desktop connection is already a slideshow and then SF is showing me Flash ads on every page, including the download pages, and when I finally punch through that mess and get the installer which I know is coming, I run the thing and it tells me I don't have an internet connection. Which is interesting, since I'm running the installer via remote desktop. Maybe it uses a port that was blocked on the network. After a few futile attempts to find a non-installer link on SF, I jumped back to my local PC and found a usable URL that I pasted into the remote desktop session to download. At least Filezilla is hosted on download.filezilla-project.org, but I'm sure there are a lot of projects hosted on SF that don't have a great alternative place to download.

Dice completely ruined the reputation of SourceForge. Slashdot isn't completely in the shitter yet, but I feel like it's inevitable. Well, we had a good run, anyway.

Re:Good (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362699)

"Sourceforge is garbage now."

So is Slashdot. Neither are an unbiased, open community anymore and as such no longer serve their intended purpose. Perhaps that was the goal all along.

Here is another bit of information that needs to be thrown in the mix.

From the Dice Holdings Inc. Third Quarter 2013 Results posted here:

http://www.diceholdingsinc.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=211152&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=1869460&highlight=

"For the quarter ended September 30, 2013, Tech & Clearance segment revenues increased 12% year-over-year to $37.0 million, or 70% of Dice Holdings' consolidated revenues. Slashdot Media contributed $3.7 million to revenues in the third quarter of 2013, as compared to $0.8 million in the same period a year ago, while The IT Job Board® added $1.1 million to Tech & Clearance revenues in the quarter after writing down $0.4 million of acquired revenue. Third quarter revenues in our Dice.com service increased slightly compared to the prior year's third quarter, while ClearanceJobs.com posted a 5% year-over-year decline in revenues due to sequestration..."

When growth in all other sectors remained relatively minimal, revenue from Slashdot increased roughly four-fold. How, in the last year alone, has Slashdot managed to bring in that much more revenue? Who handed over nearly 3 million dollars this last year?

Re:Good (4, Interesting)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#45362773)

Maybe Slashdot offer a service where a company pays a fee to guarantee a story makes it to the front page.

Re:Good (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362775)

There was probably also a four-fold increase in ads and slashvertisements drawing ad impressions.

Re:Good (-1, Redundant)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | about a year ago | (#45362971)

Somebody mod this interesting/informative, stat.

Re:Good (3, Interesting)

Trogre (513942) | about a year ago | (#45363125)

Advertisers. /. runs a business model in a similar manner to Google. Put up the content for no direct charge, and sell advertising space.

A business model I happen to like*, since I'd rather not pay a subscription fee for a website's bandwidth, hosting, etc.

* So long as the ads remain in their predictable spaces, and are not intrusive. As soon as obnoxious, flashing, "Download HERE!!!", ads start showing up I will start using adblock.

Re:Good (3, Insightful)

Deathlizard (115856) | about a year ago | (#45362817)

Just about all download sites are garbage anymore. The only one I find that has no Adware garbage on it is nonags.com, but it's woefully out of date.

When I got to tell our customers "Don't Download Anything, Anywhere, Anytime" because I can't trust any download site Including the Windows 8 Store, There's an epidemic going on.

Until AV Programs start getting a pair and flag anything that installs as bundleware malicious, this will not stop, Although you'll never see it because Big Names like Google and Microsoft Both bundle their apps with software.

If it worked for CNet's downloads.com for Windows (3, Informative)

themushroom (197365) | about a year ago | (#45362371)

then certainly the open source community would appreciate bundled bullshit too!

SourceForge (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362373)

I don't really care about GIMP, but I'm sorry, SourceForge, your glory days are over.

BTW, anyone know a reason not to host small projects on BitBucket?

first third party offer! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362383)

Click here to get mug of frosty piss!

Re:first third party offer! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363159)

Sourceforge new motto?

shovelware? (4, Funny)

Ralph Spoilsport (673134) | about a year ago | (#45362385)

I can't get enough iLivid installs! That and another Ask! toolbar! Sign me up!

So Brave (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362389)

"Note: SourceForge and Slashdot share a corporate parent."

Re:So Brave (5, Insightful)

Valdrax (32670) | about a year ago | (#45362413)

"Note: SourceForge and Slashdot share a corporate parent."

Then, have any of you (the editorial staff) thought to voice a complaint to your parent about being associated with what is widely considered a shady practice?

Re:So Brave (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362553)

This looks like a public complaint to me.

Re:So Brave (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362559)

You're expecting a little bit too much of our so-called editors.

Re:So Brave (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362669)

You've obviously been here long enough that you know the "editorial staff" don't give a fuck about "shady" business practices, so long as their pockets are getting lined in the process.

I'm sure you'll still mod me down for saying it anyway, though. Those are the perils of trying to talk sense into zealots.

who cares (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362403)

GIMP can't do CMYK, so WHO CARES??

Re:who cares (5, Insightful)

hawguy (1600213) | about a year ago | (#45362449)

GIMP can't do CMYK, so WHO CARES??

The majority of people that do graphics for web, not print?

Re:who cares (2)

suutar (1860506) | about a year ago | (#45362547)

or just want a (really) inexpensive program that can do layers.

Re:who cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362659)

but not adjustment layers

Re:who cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362765)

or style layers.

Re:who cares (2)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about a year ago | (#45363063)

Or tinted layers with a volumizing mousse cut in an attractive bob.

Re:who cares (1)

Kjella (173770) | about a year ago | (#45363257)

Paint.NET also does layers and is free for both private and commercial use. Yes, you must be running Windows but for all of us that do it's a huge step up from MS Paint in functionality, GIMP in usability and Photoshop in simplicity. I've found it to cover pretty much all my needs, those thing I'd like to do that I've found hard to do haven't been any easier in GIMP.

Re:who cares (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362645)

People who don't want to have to pay a monthly Photoshop bill care...

Re:who cares (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362709)

Or who wants their personal info well protected...

Re:who cares (5, Insightful)

NIK282000 (737852) | about a year ago | (#45362563)

It does everything else with 100% cost savings. I'm not paying Adobe near a thousand bucks for 2 features (CMYK and 16bit depth), that I can get by using a few other open source odds and ends in conjunction with Gimp.

Re:who cares (1)

Shados (741919) | about a year ago | (#45362747)

Even legitimate photoshop users never pay that much for it, unless you need the whole package with everything Adobe makes for corporate customers or whatever.

There's always a way to get it cheaper. When I bought it, it was via the discount you get when buying a wacom tablet, which you probably want anyway. The upgrade was like 350 or something from there...

Re:who cares (3, Informative)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year ago | (#45362835)

There are lots of other low cost pixel editors that compete with Photoshop. Since Adobe's moron move to the "Creative Cloud" (which may represent a state of mind among Adobe executives rather than a description of the system which is simply Software As A Service) thousands of photographers have been ditching PS. Corel's Paintshop Pro, while commercial software is less expensive than PS. Paintshop even does layers, 16 bit and CMYK output.

I do and so do millions of others (1)

dutchwhizzman (817898) | about a year ago | (#45362855)

I used to use Adobe software until very recently, because my main usage for graphics software was editing my own photographs. I take photos with a proper camera that will use a data format that has more than 8 bits per pixel and does not have lossy compression in the device. Fortunately, darkroom is now good enough to use so I won't have to. If I ever should want to "photoshop" my photos, fortunately Gimp will have RAW support in the next release. To be honest, I haven't looked at CMYK yet, but I really hope that it will have support for that too.

The arrogance that somehow millions of people that are actually prepared to pay for good software because it has features that FOSS doesn't have aren't potential users is really beyond my comprehension. Cost savings aren't just in a license fee, they are in the quality of the final product, fetching a better price, and in the time saved having a better work flow. Darktable has "just started" if you compare it to the time gimp has been around and already I see several serious photo enthusiast people use it for serious work. Since I've got it running with openCL, I haven't started Adobe Lightroom, even though Darktable is still in the "very active development" stage. Again, I don't know about CMYK since I'm not in the printing business, but given the amount of people forking out money to Adobe, I'm sure there will be plenty of shops willing to try Gimp and even donate if it will have proper CMYK and professional color profile support. Get of your high horse and start looking at improvements that will make the app better than what's available. Don't tell people they don't need it just because you yourself don't; it's degrading and makes FOSS look bad. FOSS has a good place in the server room and partially on mobile. The reason it hasn't on the desktop is partially because apps like this just aren't "the best you can get". Visicalc and WordPerfect sold millions of hardware+OS kits, just because of the one application, the rest was mediocre at best. Linux needs a few of those applications too to finally push Windows off it's pedestal.

Re:who cares (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#45362885)

Photoshop CS2 is free [techspot.com] , and it's better than GIMP even though it's nearly a decade old. There's no reason at all to use GIMP unless you are using Linux or morally oppose closed-source software.

Re:who cares (2)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#45363061)

CS2 crashes frequently on Windows... takes longer to start up, especially on lower end PCs, and doesn't seem to leave a user with any option to permanently bypass product registration, nagging the user every single time it starts up until they do.

Re:who cares (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#45363135)

And yet it is still better than GIMP, a fact that is utterly pathetic.

Re:who cares (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#45363297)

And yet it is still better than GIMP

I disagree. GIMP is way faster, you can run it from a portable usb drive without even needing to install anything, and requires far less memory resources. Photoshop is bloated with features that are unnecessary for most types of digital image editing, but still take up all of the same space.

Re:who cares (1)

bmo (77928) | about a year ago | (#45363221)

and doesn't seem to leave a user with any option to permanently bypass product registration, nagging the user every single time it starts up until they do.

You have a 6-digit slashdot ID.

I would think that someone with one would have been around the block long enough to know how to set up a disposable email account, like 10-minute-mail.

http://10minutemail.com/10MinuteMail/index.html [10minutemail.com]

You're welcome.

CS2 crashes frequently on Windows...

On what version? It runs just fine in FLP.

--
BMO

Re:who cares (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363115)

GIMP is a terminally retarded toy. Every second you use it it feels like fighting with windmills. Say you have a greylevel png you want to turn into transparency (for use as avatar). Clone the channel as alpha? Well... simple tasks must not have straight-forward solutions, hurray for teh gimp, you are the king!

If someone has any recommendations for a capable photo editor, that can work with logos, etc., please, I'm all ears. F**k teh gimp!

Re:who cares (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#45362943)

It will.... very soon now.

Re:who cares (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363179)

Agreed, plus ImageMagick has a way better user interface.

unacceptable (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362419)

This whole installer hi-jacking is unacceptable. "OpenSource" just loose serious credibility.

Re:unacceptable (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362653)

lose*

Re:unacceptable (1)

rourin_bushi (816292) | about a year ago | (#45362771)

ITYM lost*

Re:unacceptable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363045)

It can go either way.

Re:unacceptable (3, Informative)

Deathlizard (115856) | about a year ago | (#45362969)

It Gets worse.

Just about every popular Open Source program out there is Drive by Kidnapped. Just search for any Open source program on google and bing and see what I mean.

VLC media player, 7Zip and firefox seem to be the popular drive-by bait and switch downlaods I seen. There's even a chromium browser ripoff that impersonates google chrome, albeit with a square chrome logo instead of a round one.

Good! (5, Interesting)

PhrostyMcByte (589271) | about a year ago | (#45362455)

As a fellow SourceForge user, I was also outraged when I noticed this. SourceForge used to be the go-to place if you had an Open Source project you wanted hosted. They've lacked focus for some time, making all sorts of failed changes that only bloated their surface area without bringing any actual benefit. Perhaps the screws are to them to become profitable. Slashdot's semi-recent foray into HTML5 randomness and video-ads-as-articles shows similar direction.

They've lost a lot of their user base, are bleeding what they've still got, and potential new users are almost universally going to GitHub and the like. It's a bit depressing.

Re:Good! (5, Interesting)

Kardos (1348077) | about a year ago | (#45362507)

Someone should mirror sourceforge so when they do implode, the code/documents from any dormant projects isn't lost

Re:Good! (4, Insightful)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#45362825)

This is exactly the reason I stopped using source forge. Which is a shame, because in virtually every other way, it is better than Github.

Note: SourceForge and Slashdot share a corporate p (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362459)

What's this? A troll to dare abandonment of Slashdot too?

Why not Gopher? (2)

chr1st1anSoldier (2598085) | about a year ago | (#45362479)

bring back the gopher! I might have to host a Gopher server just to put Gimp on there.

That's the first smart move since (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362481)

That's the first smart move they've made since the whole export Vs. save Vs. save as Vs. overwrite Vs. CTRL-S thing.

Lol, note. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362499)

Note: SourceForge and Slashdot share a corporate parent.

Good to know I can blame the decline of two great sites on the same company.

Yeah.... (4, Interesting)

Tteddo (543485) | about a year ago | (#45362525)

Just saw this today. Guess SourceForge has gone to the dark side. Sad Really.

bravo (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about a year ago | (#45362539)

Just... bravo.

SorceForge jumped the shark long ago... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362567)

...unless you're running an iron-clad adblocker. It's like Vegas on every page and especially for downloads.

This is why people have been migrating to GitHub and bigger projects have been consolidating into major OSS players that can afford their own servers/presence (ex: Apache, Mozilla, etc). I'm surprised so few established projects use BT as their primary distribution channel considering all you need to do is run a BT daemon on your server to seed it. In the worst case, you use the same amount of bandwidth, while in the best others reduce your load.

All web companies that act as intermediaries eventually become the ad-infested hell-holes that they replaced as they try to turn greater and greater profits out of their properties. Tucows and most gaming news sites from the late 90s are prime examples.

Three strikes against torrent for smaller projects (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#45362789)

True, Linux distributions and OpenOffice/LibreOffice appear to be the biggest users of torrent among free software projects. I can guess three reasons for this. First, not all free software projects have releases as big as those, and torrent isn't really optimized for small files. Second, people not already using a torrent client or a GNU/Linux distribution that preinstalls a torrent client would have to download both a torrent client and the project. Third, a lot of organizations block torrent but not regular HTTPS or HTTP downloads, and even a user who can run a torrent client might not be able to open an incoming TCP port. Cloud delivery networks (CDNs) give some of the same benefits as torrent hosting without these same problems.

Re:Three strikes against torrent for smaller proje (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363023)

It makes sense, though. You'd still offer HTTP and FTP downloads while making BT the first choice. Those that don't have BT clients would get them. Most people have them, anyway.

But the "cloud" delivery will either cost more or eventually slide down the slippery slope toward SourceForge and Tucows. We're trying to be economical for a project that is likely not funded well enough to pay much in the way of services.

Re:SorceForge jumped the shark long ago... (1)

mythosaz (572040) | about a year ago | (#45362963)

I'm surprised so few established projects use BT as their primary distribution channel considering all you need to do is run a BT daemon on your server to seed it

Well, first you need to have the majority of your clients download a BT client, from a similar collection of shady sites with DOWNLOAD NOW arrows pointing everywhere. Of course you can host a copy of a small BT client on your server, but which one? The tiny one with obvious pirate search ads at the top, or the one wrapped in a similar bloatware wrapper? Will the BT installer get past the file-download-proxy-scanner at your office? Maybe.

Then, likely, you need to have all of your corporate customers wait until they get home to download your software, because running a BT client in any big company gets you fired. Then, when they bring the software in on USB, they can get permission from security to insert it into a machine without getting audited.

Now you can install GIMP, if you have rights on your machine.

Re:SorceForge jumped the shark long ago... (1)

undefinedreference (2677063) | about a year ago | (#45363213)

If you work for J Random Megacorp with iron-clad IT policies, why are you using GIMP for image manipulation? It doesn't sound like this would be to the exclusion of other methods.

It's like the US Republican Party (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362591)

Unless you're ideologically pure, then you're a sellout and should be ostracized by everyone with true values.

So nobody can make much traction and the other side wins.

Alternate host? (4, Interesting)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | about a year ago | (#45362595)

sf.net was the only project host which still offered release downloads. Not every project can afford a deviated download solutions for all their releases.
Now that sf.net has been compromised, what alternative are there?

It's quite ridiculous considering that the sf.net download mirrors are sponsored.

Re:Alternate host? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362689)

github.com/randomuser/randomproject/archive/tag.tar.gz

Windows binaries (1)

tepples (727027) | about a year ago | (#45362863)

I think "release downloads" was supposed to include binaries for the Windows operating system. It's sort of hard to get end users to buy Microsoft Visual Studio in order to compile your application from source in order to try it.

Re:Windows binaries (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363043)

right. different terminology. i'd call those binaries and not a release.

Re:Alternate host? (1)

ColdWetDog (752185) | about a year ago | (#45362849)

"deviated download solution"?

Mind sharing a link with us?

Try Savannah - The FSF version of Sourceforge (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363127)

The FSF run their own project hosting website at http://savannah.nongnu.org/ [nongnu.org]

I suspect it's about to become rather more popular.

Re:Alternate host? (1)

Trogre (513942) | about a year ago | (#45363191)

This is a big problem for Windows and Mac users. Linux users who don't stick close to the bleeding edge aren't affected quite as much, since we get the vast majority of FOSS software from distro repos.

Want to download widgetSmasherX?

sudo yum/apt-get install widgetSmasherX
Done.

Likewise for Android users, who just install via the F-Droid repo.

Bleeding-edge Linux users will most likely be fine, as they will be savvy enough to find their software elsewhere and compile if needs be.

Why not GitHub (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362609)

Typical open sores; behind on the times

Third Party Offers (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362629)

What is happening with Sourceforge is truly sad. Some of these third party offers are no more than browser hijackers.

-Ron Scubadiver, Independent Photojournalist

Not. Acceptable. (4, Informative)

BaldingByMicrosoft (585534) | about a year ago | (#45362649)

Please inform your "corporate parent" that installer hijacking is a dick move.

Re:Not. Acceptable. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362705)

Please inform your "corporate parent" that installer hijacking is a dick move.

I'm sure we will be informed that they don't care.

How would an installer work.... (1)

mark-t (151149) | about a year ago | (#45362677)

... if you were downloading source code?

Do they have separate installers for every conceivable operating system or something?

Re:How would an installer work.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45362717)

People usually don't compile Gimp for Windows. Instead they take the installer provided by the project, and modified by Sf...

FTP? (-1, Troll)

Bogtha (906264) | about a year ago | (#45362687)

Why on earth would you use FTP in this day and age? It's garbage designed for pre-Internet networks. It doesn't even define how file listings work, clients have to use heuristics to guess at how to interpret them. It's got a weird two-connection model that doesn't play nice with firewalls. It should have died a long time ago.

Re:FTP? (2)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#45362819)

It doesn't support tracking cookies.

Re:FTP? (1)

mythosaz (572040) | about a year ago | (#45362981)

To Do: Add tracking cookie support to FTP.

Re:FTP? (2)

rourin_bushi (816292) | about a year ago | (#45362843)

I truly hope they don't migrate to FTP only. Using it as their *canonical* download might be ok, but as plenty of other people have mentioned, FTP is a bit outdated. Really, if you're already migrating to a dedicated host, why not use HTTP? And put a BT link up for the majority of us with a client already installed.

(using BT as the sole source isn't really a good solution for folks who don't have admin rights to install a BT client, such as on my work box here)

Re:FTP? (1)

godrik (1287354) | about a year ago | (#45362939)

Though nowadays you just click on ftp:// [ftp] ... link and get the right file right away. So I am not sure the file listing problem matters that much.

Re:FTP? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#45363163)

Why on earth would you use FTP in this day and age? It's garbage designed for pre-Internet networks. It doesn't even define how file listings work, clients have to use heuristics to guess at how to interpret them. It's got a weird two-connection model that doesn't play nice with firewalls. It should have died a long time ago.

What would you use?

Isn't the installer opt-in? (2)

edxwelch (600979) | about a year ago | (#45362783)

I have a project on Sourceforge and it just uses it's own installer (Nullsoft). So, I would assume that you have a choice to use the adware installer, or not if you don't want to.

Re:Isn't the installer opt-in? (2)

jonwil (467024) | about a year ago | (#45362865)

If its anything like some of the other spyware installers I have seen, its simply a wrapper around the user-provided installer.
So you run their installer which does all the spyware stuff and then runs the real installer exe.

The SourceForge Death Spiral (5, Insightful)

benjfowler (239527) | about a year ago | (#45362907)

Am I the only one who noticed that while once upon a time, SourceForge were great, that it's declining popularity (no thanks to Google Code and Github) and falling website hits forced them to put up more, spammier, scammier ads?

Then about a year or so ago, they went full-AOL, and the standards of the ads dropped dramatically, with misleading 'download button' ads leading to dodgy downloads; their hits must've dropped further, necessitating even more, even scammier ads.

Looks pretty much like a tailspin to me. Too bad, because Sourceforge was one of the first and best Open Source hosting platforms at one stage.

If I were in charge of it, I'd just take it out behind the shed and put it out of its misery.

Re:The SourceForge Death Spiral (1)

TechyImmigrant (175943) | about a year ago | (#45363015)

You are not alone.

I first hit this when fetching subversion. I think it gave me an Ask Jeeves toolbar pox instead.

Dancing the Dice Death (0)

landofcleve (1959610) | about a year ago | (#45363327)

Too bad Slashdot has them as a dance partner in this slow march to hell.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?