Re: [Debian-sf-users] State of the 'Forge?

[Soon-Son Kwon]

Thanks for good information.
I didn't know XoopsForge & GBorg so far and fairly impressed 
on XoopsForge.

I also tried to find the best solution to build sf-like website
for more than 1 year but still trying...

For me, i18n is the biggest issue because I am Korean and the users will
be Koreans too. If you think you need some feature that is not currently
implemented in the source, you can submit patch yourself...

I don't know how other projects are going but as for debian-sf,
it is actively maintained so if your patch or feature request is reasonable,
it will be finally merged.

Being a *.deb package will make the installation & upgrade very easy.
For me, that's the biggest advantage of debian-sf over other projects
and the developers are well aware of how to work on that.

Though the 2.6 series has a long way to be a truly distributed system and
has lots of bugs, I think they will be fixed sooner or later
and debian-sf will be a good choice for woody box.

Good luck to you....


On Thu, May 30, 2002 at 12:18:51PM -0500, Mathew Jason Binkley wrote:
> Hi.  I'm trying to build a website using Sourceforge or something similar for 
> Vanderbilt University researchers to host computer source and datasets.  Thus 
> far I've looked at: 
> 
>      * Debian-SF      [ http://www.freesoftware.fsf.org/debian-sf/ ] 
>      * sf-genericinst [ http://sf-genericinst.sourceforge.net ] 
>      * Savannah       [ http://savannah.gnu.org ] 
> 
> and Sourceforge clones: 
> 
>      * XoopsForge     [ http://xoopsforge.sourceforge.net ] 
>      * GBorg          [ http://gborg.postgresql.org ] 
> 
> Not to be mean, but they are all either bleeding raw to the point of being 
> unmaintainable, or lack the basic functionality we need (CVS/web/mailing 
> list). 
> 
> Since I've heard mention that the various SourceForge groups are working to 
> unify their codebases, I was wondering if someone in the know could give a 
> small "State of the (open) Sourceforge" message about how things stand and 
> where they're going.  It's hairpulling trying to make a long-term decision 
> about which program to use given the current state of affairs. 
> 
> In my experience, Sourceforge has little documentation, ugly code, requires 
> days of work to get semi-working on my Debian Woody box (mostly due to LDAP), 
> and has a ton of "Sourceforge.net"-specific stuff that needs to be cleaned 
> out. 
> XoopsForge is brand new and growing fast, very clean code, but doesn't 
> support 
> the features we need.  GBorg installs almost out of the box, but isn't being 
> actively maintained (last version is 1+ years old), has myriad tiny bugs in 
> the 
> lastest stable distribution and like SourceForge a lot 
> of "gborg.postgresql.org"-specific stuff. 
> 
> Hopefully I haven't ignited a flame war, because I'm genuinely interested in 
> all of them, and respect the amount of hard work it takes to build/maintain 
> something like it.  If anyone knows any other software I haven't mentioned, I 
> would love to hear about it. 
> 
> 
> Mat
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> Mathew Jason Binkley
> Vanderbilt University
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Debian-sf-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.freesoftware.fsf.org/mailman/listinfo/debian-sf-users

-- 
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*
           (o_             **WTFM**
(o_  (o_   //\
(/)_ (/)_  V_/_        http://kldp.org
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*