Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.programming > #8064 > unrolled thread

Why GitHub (not SourceForge)?

Back to article view | Back to comp.programming

Contents

  Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2017-09-26 22:42 +0300
    Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2017-09-30 03:50 -0700
      Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2017-10-01 03:37 +0700
        Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2017-10-01 13:32 -0700
          Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? Victor Porton <porton@narod.ru> - 2017-10-02 00:26 +0300
            Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? Chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2017-10-02 09:23 -0700
              Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2017-10-03 05:50 +0700
            Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2017-10-06 03:46 +0100
    Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2017-10-05 05:05 +0200
      Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2017-10-06 02:31 +0700
        Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2017-10-07 18:42 +0200
    Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? Leo <chris@chris-macleod.ca> - 2017-10-05 08:43 -0400
      Re: Why GitHub (not SourceForge)? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2017-10-05 15:06 -0700

#8064 — Why GitHub (not SourceForge)?

Why most programmers prefer GitHub or BitBucket over SourceForge?

-- 
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#8071

W dniu wtorek, 26 września 2017 21:42:40 UTC+2 użytkownik Victor Porton napisał:
> Why most programmers prefer GitHub or BitBucket over SourceForge?
> 
i prefer zip script like that

 "c:\Program Files\WinRAR\rar.exe" a -ag-YYYY-MM-DD-hh-mm -r  "c:\backups\CODE.zip" "c:\CODE\"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8072

On Sat, 30 Sep 2017 03:50:03 -0700 (PDT), fir wrote:
> W dniu wtorek, 26 września 2017 21:42:40 UTC+2 użytkownik Victor Porton napisał:
>> Why most programmers prefer GitHub or BitBucket over SourceForge?
>> 
> i prefer zip script like that
> 
>  "c:\Program Files\WinRAR\rar.exe" a -ag-YYYY-MM-DD-hh-mm -r  "c:\backups\CODE.zip" "c:\CODE\"

ZIP doesn't have anything to do with subversioning system.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8074

I was always under the impression that GitHub and SourceForge were meant for different things. So in other words, it is like comparing apple to oranges.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8077

Chad wrote:

> I was always under the impression that GitHub and SourceForge were meant
> for different things. So in other words, it is like comparing apple to
> oranges.

Please elaborate. What is the difference of their purposes?

-- 
Victor Porton - http://portonvictor.org

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8078

On Sunday, October 1, 2017 at 2:26:06 PM UTC-7, Victor Porton wrote:
> Chad wrote:
> 
> > I was always under the impression that GitHub and SourceForge were meant
> > for different things. So in other words, it is like comparing apple to
> > oranges.
> 
> Please elaborate. What is the difference of their purposes?
> 

I'm speaking from very very limited experience...

SourceForge seems to be for collaborative projects. GitHub is meant for "real time" changes. I don't know the correct term. For example, at my job, the only way to deploy a piece of software to the cloud is via GitHub.

And in some cases, what I've seen are people that can make patches to the code on the spot without having to recompile anything. After that, those changes get reflected right away on the client side but not on the server side. And these changes get controlled via GitHub. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8079

On Mon, 2 Oct 2017 09:23:13 -0700 (PDT), Chad wrote:
> On Sunday, October 1, 2017 at 2:26:06 PM UTC-7, Victor Porton wrote:
>> Chad wrote:
>> 
>>> I was always under the impression that GitHub and SourceForge were meant
>>> for different things. So in other words, it is like comparing apple to
>>> oranges.
>> 
>> Please elaborate. What is the difference of their purposes?
>> 
> 
> I'm speaking from very very limited experience...
> 
> SourceForge seems to be for collaborative projects. GitHub is meant for
> "real time" changes. I don't know the correct term. For example, at my
> job, the only way to deploy a piece of software to the cloud is via
> GitHub. 
> 
> And in some cases, what I've seen are people that can make patches to the
> code on the spot without having to recompile anything. After that, those
> changes get reflected right away on the client side but not on the server
> side.. And these changes get controlled via GitHub.

What you've mentioned is about the Git version control system, not the
GitHub website itself. After all, GitHub can not exist without the Git
version control system because Git version control is a separate software.
i.e. is not originally designed to be used as part of a web werver.

GitHub is a website which is dedicated to the Git version control system. It
doesn't use other version control system.

SourceForge on the other hand, use several version control systems (e.g.
CVS, SVN, Mercurial, etc. including Git). However, the site is not (and can
not be) dedicated to any of them. This is inevitable due to the difference
between each version control system.

IMO, Git is a newer version control system. Thus, it has more features and
better control. But the downside is that it's more complicated to use -
especially for developers who aren't familiar with version control. So, some
developers may prefer version control system other than Git.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8087

On 01/10/17 22:26, Victor Porton wrote:
> Chad wrote:
> 
>> it is like comparing apple to oranges.
> 
> Please elaborate. What is the difference of their purposes?

Apple does tablets (and a different Apple sells Beatles records - but 
only one of them is The Real Apple).

Orange used to run a mobile phone network, before they got taken over by 
Orange.

While we're on the subject: Apricot used to make PCs in the UK, and 
Blackberry makes mobile phones. Cherry? Keyboards. Raspberries are 
little Linux boxes which, for some reason, are /not/ in the shape of a pie.

Finally, it has been observed that a number of technology companies 
produce lemons on a regular basis.

-- 
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8080

On 9/26/2017 9:42 PM, Victor Porton wrote:
> Why most programmers prefer GitHub or BitBucket over SourceForge?
> 

As I recall people migrated /en masse/ from SourceForge when it engaged 
in discriminatory practices. I think it had something to do with Iran. 
As a US company with servers in the US it had to what uncle Sam said.


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8084

On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 05:05:13 +0200, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> On 9/26/2017 9:42 PM, Victor Porton wrote:
>> Why most programmers prefer GitHub or BitBucket over SourceForge?
>> 
> 
> As I recall people migrated /en masse/ from SourceForge when it engaged 
> in discriminatory practices. I think it had something to do with Iran. 
> As a US company with servers in the US it had to what uncle Sam said.
> 
> Cheers & hth.,
> 
> - Alf

Please don't spread fake news.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8091

On 10/5/2017 9:31 PM, JJ wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Oct 2017 05:05:13 +0200, Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
>> On 9/26/2017 9:42 PM, Victor Porton wrote:
>>> Why most programmers prefer GitHub or BitBucket over SourceForge?
>>>
>>
>> As I recall people migrated /en masse/ from SourceForge when it engaged
>> in discriminatory practices. I think it had something to do with Iran.
>> As a US company with servers in the US it had to what uncle Sam said.
>>
>> Cheers & hth.,
>>
>> - Alf
> 
> Please don't spread fake news.

Please don't be fucking stupid in public.

You should be able to look up the country restrictions in e.g. Wikipedia.

Ah, there:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SourceForge#Country_restrictions

For the mass migration you just have to take my word, or dig deeper.


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8081

SourceForge lost a lot of popularity when they started bundling unwanted
third-party software with misleading options in their installers.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#8086

On Thursday, 5 October 2017 15:44:02 UTC+3, Leo  wrote:
> SourceForge lost a lot of popularity when they started bundling unwanted
> third-party software with misleading options in their installers.

Yes, all basically migrated their projects elsewhere because of that
crapware in installers. The new owners of Sourceforge eliminated that
practice February 2016:

https://sourceforge.net/blog/sourceforge-acquisition-and-future-plans/

Gaining lost good name back is likely hard.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.programming

csiph-web