Hi John,
On Thu, 25 Oct 2001, John Mark Walker wrote:
> That would be because there is no such thing as ftp.sourceforge.net
> - well, there is, but it's going away, and we really rate limit that
> thing. Our new download schema - http://download.sf.net - pumps over
> 100mbps in 4 locations worldwide. That is not slow, and I use it
> personally on a daily basis as it is my primary conduit to software
> downloads. Please give it another try before berating it. Also, the
> downloads of project file releases are blazingly fast - you should
> try it sometime.
But ftp.sourceforge.net is the only way to get access to several
projects which are hosted on sourceforge. And it stopped me
investigating further into these projects because I couldn't get them
without major effort.
That's simply my personal experience as a SF user.
> In the past, I have been in contact with various people on this list
> to encourage the use of SourceForge.net for sapdb development. That
> invitation is obviously still open, and I'm more than happy to
> discuss this with the development team.
>
> Also, the story referenced here is completely inaccurate. If you're
> going to reference that story, the least you can do is reference the
> bit from my boss that he submitted on the Advogato site:
The details are perhaps inaccurate, but IMHO the fundamental point is
valid: Why put all the eggs in one basket?
I am not against VA and do not think it will go away, but it is a
single entity which is responsible for a lot of projects. I really do
appreciate the contribution VA is offering to the open source
world. But I don't think it should be an automatism to put open source
projects on SF. Open source lives from diversity.
Just my 2 cents
Christoph
