|
|
|
|
|
by eesmith
1522 days ago
|
|
That's the "ill-conceived DevShare" mentioned. From the paper: > While DevShare was an opt-in service, some projects complained that SourceForge bundled third-party adware in their downloads without their consent.25 Ads were added to project download pages with fake download buttons to trick users into clicking on the ad. Often, clicking on these ads resulted in the download of adware. > Management focused on ROI; SourceForge was expensive to run and did not have a plan to bring in revenue. This led to the introduction of DevShare, but since management did not understand the open source ethos and the development team was not included in management decisions, DevShare was a major failure. It prioritized ROI over trust and bundled adware with project downloads. Many projects started leaving SourceForge, citing DevShare as a main reason. |
|
Then, I instantly flipped to having a very strong commitment to never again trust SourceForge. You've probably heard about how a reputation is built over years but can be destroyed in an instant... that's exactly what happened here.
Part of the reason is that from the point of view of the person downloading (binary executable) software, the most important feature the site provided was my trust that they would give me the same binary I was asking for. In a similar vein, if I discovered that a bank had been intentionally lying about account balances and adjusting them in the bank's favor to make a profit, I would immediately and permanently sever my relationship with that bank.