On Wed, 2003-01-22 at 10:06, Brian McGuiness wrote:
> Further to the discussions the other week, i've looked into both
> Sourceforge (www.sourceforge.org) and Savannah (www.savannah.nongnu.org)
>
> Sourceforge (SF) is larger (~55,000 projects, ~550,000 users) compared
> to Savannah (SV) (~1400 projects, ~13,000 users) although both seem to
> offer very similar functions - CVS repository, home page, mailing lists,
> download area, etc.
AFAIK, they are different revisions of the same code - therefore they
have similar functions. SF is backed by a commercial entity. SV,
AFAIK, is backed by the FSF.
> My only worry would be the OCF license not being
> compatible with SVs GPL requirement but we could look into that.
I don't think the OCF license is a problem. I read the OCF license to
be BSD-ish which is generally considered to be "more free" than GPL.
I'm pretty sure it's compatible.
> I know that there were some changes to the SF Terms & Conditions a while
> back which some people didn't like as they claimed it left scope for SF
> to run off with your project some time in the future or start charging
> subscriptions for access but I don't know how likely either of these
> would be. There was some discussion on it at Slashdot about a year ago
> see
My biggest gripe with SF is that it is backed by a commercial entity.
The projects hosted there are subject to stockholders as opposed to
project owners and such. I basically don't trust SF to be around. I
personally wouldn't host a project there as I would be nervous that at
any time my CVS repository could go away. JBOSS CVS was in-accessable
for about a week recently. I do not know if they got it back yet.
Provided SV is in fact hosted by FSF, I would put much more trust in it
to be around for the long run.
I don't think it's exposure vs. rabid GNU adherence (as put by Mr
Kiniry). To continue the analogy, I'd rather have my source code
protected by a rabid dog than one subject to a T-bone-steak. That
doesn't make me rabid myself.
If SF gives project owners a contract, guaranteeing source/ownership
upon fold or other change, my fears would be nullified.
> I'm not overly bothered which one we go for. I find the SV pages
> slightly nicer on the eye but SF has a much larger user base which may
> make it more attractive.
If I had to pick one of the two, I vote SV. IMO, exposure is a
non-issue. This is the Internet afterall. We have search engines and
other methods of getting our URL known. Won't opencard.org point to the
correct site anyways?
-joe
--
Innovation Software Group, LLC - http://www.innovationsw.com/
Business Automation Specialists
UNIX, Linux and Java Training
---
> Visit the OpenCard web site at http://www.opencard.org/ for more
> information on OpenCard---binaries, source code, documents.
> This list is being archived at http://www.opencard.org/archive/opencard/
! To unsubscribe from the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list send an email
! to
! [EMAIL PROTECTED]
! containing the word
! unsubscribe
! in the body.
