Christoph, I agree with your comments. I simply did not want SF.net dismissed out of hand because of a largely inaccurate article on the Net.
Also, your complaints about ftp.sf.net are noted. One of the things we've tried to do is get projects to use the file release system or offer downloads directly from their web site space, as opposed to the ftp site. I guess we have work yet to do on this front. I keep tabs on sapdb.org pretty frequently, and I'm pretty impressed with the documentation available there. The only thing that I don't like is that most of the information is all 1-way. There is no place for contributors to take part in project management, for example. As has been mentioned here previously, there is no bug tracker, and no access to bleeding-edge code. Perhaps this is by design, and that's up to the development team. The community building aspect is another part of this. While I would never suggest that you need SourceForge to build a community, I can only think that it would help. I would also mention that we do not have a monopoly in this area, but I can't say that too loudly :@) Basically, I guess I'm saying that you should consider something *like* SourceForge.net, even if you don't use SourceForge itself... although I would certainly be happier if you did. Thanks, John Mark Walker SF.net Foundry Manager
