When I see a project on SourceForge I assume it's over 10 years old and unmaintained.
For years, SourceForge has been among the ugliest, least usable sites on the internet, and now it has massive amounts of ad spam all over it.
One of the reasons Github grew so quickly was simply b/c of the better UX. Git is marginally better than other version control systems, but the major void that Github filled was that it offered a nice looking, usable place to put open source code.
Their UX/sign-in etc., is now on par with github and others.
They got rid of the ads also. Also I have adblockers installed. If you/your audience are the type frequenting HN and working on code by and large, you'll also have some kind of adblocker installed on the browsers? Aren't ads a non-issue under these circumstances?
>> When I see a project on SourceForge I assume it's over 10 years old and unmaintained
Hmmm.. I don't even know where or how to address that strong an opinion (I'm not even sure I want to, TBH). Let's just say, that's not a correct statement.
P.S: Github (blog) also carries job ads on the sides, so does SO. At times, ads are a necessary evil of the internet ecosystem, specially when it comes to (largely) free services
While they have definitely make jumps in their UI and UX. It is Definitely NOT on par with GitHub.
And they didn't get rid of Ads. There are simply less of them. Not that i have a problem with earning money from Ads, but from a limited UI point of view we already have too many info we want and need.
Has SourceForge done this years earlier it may still have a fighting chance against Github. Now the only contender left is BitBucket.
For years, SourceForge has been among the ugliest, least usable sites on the internet, and now it has massive amounts of ad spam all over it.
One of the reasons Github grew so quickly was simply b/c of the better UX. Git is marginally better than other version control systems, but the major void that Github filled was that it offered a nice looking, usable place to put open source code.