On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com> wrote:
On Seg, 2016-03-14 at 08:54 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
> On 03/13/2016 08:12 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Mar 13, 2016 at 9:15 PM, David Timms <dtimms(a)iinet.net.au>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi, I've worked out what seemed to be a correct URL for for
> > > rakarrack
> > > spec, now that it is accessed via git within the sf website:
> > >
> > > I couldn't work out how to fit the sourceforce git URLs from:
> > >
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Sourceforge.ne
> > > t
> > > or
> > >
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:SourceURL#Git_Hosting_Se
> > > rvices
> > >
> > > to suit. Any ideas for a standard way to handle sf git snapshots
> > > ?
> > Move them to github. Seriously. Sourceforge has been playing
> > various
> > games to avoid accessing content without going through their
> > adveritising functions since they were first founded, and I've
> > found
> > no reason to work with any project hosted there
> > since..... checking
> > old notes, not since 2009.
Devshare (I think it is called devshare) was a mistake and only happens
on windows, and all the fault can't be impute to
sf.net.
sf.net was and
still is an important organization that support open source and free
software .
I didn't mention Devshare. I referred to the confusing and difficult
to predict mishmosh of redirects, used to force developers like myself
to click thorugh at least one page of undesired graphical
advertisement to get a working URL for the actual source code.