[Where do I find...] Source Control Website

[kingpaul]

I know of sourceforge.net, but I don't care much for that site.

I realize that you've already found a solution, but I'm curious on what you don't like about SF, as that's what we use.

 

[TheLe]

I realize that you've already found a solution, but I'm curious on what you don't like about SF, as that's what we use.

Mostly the look and feel. Keep in mind that I have not used SourceForge in about 5 years, and it does look a little better today than it did back then. However, it still looks and feels very unix-y, and very user unfriendly. The tools are fine, but the webpage design is just horrible and is something that only a 40-year-old programmer could love.

And today, it looks like it is overrun with ads, which take up more than 50% of real estate when you arrive at any page.

On the other hand, SourceForge was excellent for tracking bugs and version control, and I am sure it still is today. As a free source code repository, it is very good. I just wish it was a little more user friendly.

If codeplex doesn't work out for me, I will very likely be heading back to SourceForge, but I'd like to keep that as a last resort.

`Le

 

[Alan Shutko]

Hmmm... I wouldn't put a new project on SF either, probably. Personally, I thought their forums and bug tracking interfaces were terrible. For version control, last I checked it was just SVN and CVS, neither of which I'd go back to if I had a choice. (The newer distributed systems are just so much handier for merging.) And it's had so many system problems over the years that I just don't trust them. They might have gotten all of those fixed, for now, but it still leaves a bad taste in my mouth.

 

[andargor]

The tools are fine, but the webpage design is just horrible and is something that only a 40-year-old programmer could love.

What do you have against 40-year old programmers?

 

[thpr]

Hmmm... I wouldn't put a new project on SF either, probably.

I would. ... but you won't find me defending much about the features at SourceForge. The value of hosting there has nothing to do with SF features, but its other value... as a hub of open source software. Never underestimate the value of their momentum. It's a great place to use to grow your user base and to host your files while you are growing and can't afford your own site. Once the project is running and has lots of developers, the value of SF diminishes significantly.

Personally, I thought their forums and bug tracking interfaces were terrible.

Agreed. The bug tracking design is 5 years old, and it shows. There are so many other features that exist in Bugzilla, Flyspray, trac, and other open source bug tracking systems that they should shoot what they have an intergrate another tool. I suspect the problem is simply one of too much momentum and too much legacy code without enough development resource.

For version control, last I checked it was just SVN and CVS, neither of which I'd go back to if I had a choice. (The newer distributed systems are just so much handier for merging.)

Again, this depends heavily on what one is doing and the culture of the project. Given a small project, SVN is fine. Once the project grows, however, there may be advantages to other systems, if the key developers are comfortable with them. With PCGen as it exists today, I don't think there is much advantage to the distributed systems. Because the PCGen culture is what I would refer to as a "low branch" culture, SVN works okay. It's certainly not my coding style (I prefer lots of development in branches for the sake of exploration), but culture changes slowly, so I suspect SVN will serve us well into the future.

TP.
--
Tom Parker
PCGen Architecture 2nd