New Python development process (SourceForge considered Harmful?)

[Tom]

I've heard people defend SF's banner ads as only being for SF projects.
Maybe that was true once, but it isn't anymore - today, for example, I've
seen ads for "Animation Factory - Premium Gold Site" and for IBM.

There isn't actually anything wrong with this - they need to make money.
But people shouldn't pretend that there is something morally good about SF.
If they are providing a service for the Open-Source community its because
they have a plan to make a lot of money from it.

Personally, I've got too many ads in my life, so I prefer to pay for things,
rather than have to put up with lots of ads.

Tom



"Bernhard Reiter" <breiter at usf.Uni-Osnabrueck.DE> wrote in message
news:8rhsgu$i8j$3 at newsserver.rrzn.uni-hannover.de...
> In article <8qss6t$7i$1 at saltmine.radix.net>,
> cobrien at Radix.Net (Cary O'Brien) writes:
>
> >>   In May of 2000, the Python CVS tree was moved to SourceForge.
> >
> > Does anyone else worry about the continuing increasing reliance on
> > SourceForge by the "OpenSource Community" (for lack of a better term)?
> > It seems like almost everything is moving there.
>
> Yes I am also worried. (And spoke up about it when Python was moving.)
> Even a Linux Weekly News article raised some concerns a while back.
> Check out the current one which talks about
> the new sourceforge long due privacy policy,
> which still is far from being perfect.
>
> Regards,
> Bernhard
>
> --
> Professional Service around Free Software                (intevation.net)
> The FreeGIS Project             (freegis.org)
> Association for a Free Informational Infrastructure            (ffii.org)