Jump to content

Talk:Comparison of source-code-hosting facilities/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Ad-free?

What does "add-free" mean?

ad-free means without ads (advertisement). 84.24.169.50 16:15, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

This page look should be improved

This page does not look good, if compared with another "comparison" pages of Wikipedia. Some descriptive text must be added before the big table, and the table look must be completely changed to match other "comparison" pages. Look at some examples:

Comparison_of_instant_messengers Comparison_of_Web_browsers Comparison_of_Media_players

I will probably do this later when I have some time, here is a site that has alot of the information borken down if someone wants to do it before me: http://www.ibiblio.org/fosphost/exhost.htm --Deemo 19:28, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Compare groupware/communication facilities. This would be very useful for teams to collaborate. I am particularly looking for a site that can allow NNTP access to forums/mailing-lists, or better yet, complete groupware, like Kolab.

Asynchrony.com

Does not seem to be offering hosting for software hosting projects, or I can't find it. Link spam? --CodeGeneratR 20:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Two new ones

Should Microsoft CodePlex and Google Hosting also be included here? -- Peter 10:17, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Free software

Why isn't there a column for noting which hosting facilities are either run using proprietary software or host their services with entirely free software? --71.254.12.10 04:14, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Yep, adding a column now! Mike Linksvayer 04:45, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

CodePlex & Open Source

From [1]:

What does an open source license mean? An “open source” style license means users are, without a fee, permitted to view the code, and run it at least for non-commercial purposes.

Neither open source nor free software definitions apply to these terms. The given definition seems to be similar to shared source. So I will remove the CodePlex entry. --Hyperyl 17:44, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Good call. Shinobu (talk) 15:13, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

SourceForge TOS section 6

Odd how this article completely fails to mention this. Shinobu (talk) 12:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, there are 27 sections in the agreement[2]. Why should section 6 be mentioned specifically? 88.112.14.27 (talk) 22:41, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Please read section six, instead of just looking at the total number of sections and closing the page. Shinobu (talk) 15:09, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

I've read the page several times, but could not determine why you think section 6 is so important. That's why I asked why it should be mentioned specifically. So could you clarify what's so special about section 6? 88.112.14.27 (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Gna is listed twice.

Under "General" and "Specific Requirements". Gna requires its projects all be free software as defined by the FSF, so would that be allowable for "general"? They're both listed under slightly different names (Gna.org versus Gna!, one uses the https URL); that's a bit odd. -Matt 19:19, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Fixed Clconway (talk) 16:18, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

This page is not really about "libre" software, "gratis" software, or even "gratis" hosting of software: it is about open source software. Several of the listed facilities (e.g., Microsoft's) do not require the hosted software be "free" in the Free Software Foundation sense. I propose the page be moved to "Comparison of open source software hosting facilities". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clconway (talk • contribs) 16:28, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

What features do they offer?

- Webspace for Homepages?
- Dynamic Homepages with PHP/Python or Perl?
- Bugtracker System? Which one?
- SVN, CVS or GIT access?
- FTP access?
It would be nice if these features could be added to the list for better comparison.
--84.56.171.213 (talk) 07:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but add also: do they support mailing lists? (also, I don't understand the request for listing of svn etc. access, that is most prominent in the page now). LiamH (talk) 13:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

What about public/private repositories?

I am looking for a source code repository that allows me to lock the project with a password even for viewing (not just for modifying). The article doesn't mention such an option. Is it because Free Software Hosting Facilities by definition require the code to be publicly viewable? Sandman2007 (talk) 16:29, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not required by definition; in fact, you're describing the cathedral model of software development. However, the purpose of a project hosting site is usually to allow everyone to find and explore the project itself. --Mike (talk) 05:47, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

software hosting software?

Is there simmilar list of software hosting sotfware? I mean, like gforge, trac etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.27.97.50 (talk) 16:52, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Linkfarm and inclusion criteria

The Website columns need to be removed per WP:EL and WP:NOT#LINK. Given that there is no inclusion criteria per WP:LIST, all entries without their own Wikipedia article should be removed. --Ronz (talk) 00:03, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I removed the links. --Ronz (talk) 19:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

What's "Code review"?

The comparison table has a "Code review" column. I know what a code review is, but how can this be a feature? Do they have robots that are going to review my code? I don't get it.

"Code review" means Code review system like Launchpad's one or Google's one.--211.121.56.112 (talk) 04:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

BerliOS

Is there a reason BerliOS is missing from the features table? 64.7.147.58 (talk) 03:55, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Requesting an addition

I'm associated with ActiveState, so (as per Wikipedia guidelines) I wanted to request that Workspace from ActiveState be added to the first table. Based on the table columns, here's what I've put together:

Name: Workspace
Code hosting: Yes
Code review: No
Bug tracking: No
Web hosting: No
Wiki: Yes
Translation system: No
Mailing List: No
News Group (NNTP): No
Forum: Yes
Personal branch: Yes
Private branch: Yes
Announce: No
Build system: No
Team: No
Other: Automated backup, blogs

Dbarefoot (talk) 04:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Where's the notability? --Hm2k (talk) 09:35, 27 May 2009 (UTC)


darcs hosting anywhere?

There is no place for darcs in the table. Aren't there any darcs hostings? It's a pity.--Imz (talk) 17:49, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, there's code.haskell.org, but it's very minimalistic (e.g., no built-in bug tracking, so far as I can tell). OCaml Forge also supports darcs, but not seemingly through the GForge interface (I think you have to ssh into the server to access darcs). None of the freely available hosting systems (except for Launchpad, which is built for Bazaar) offer support for SCMs besides CVS, SVN, or GNU Arch. Clconway (talk) 19:04, 5 May 2008 (UTC)
There is http://patch-tag.com/ now --Nomeata (talk) 20:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Internet/Web_Design_and_Development/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sanjiv swarup (talk • contribs) 01:54, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Don't you mean http://www.dmoz.org/Computers/Open_Source/Hosting/ ? Shinobu (talk) 15:12, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
agreed . Why dont you put it up in the article Sanjiv swarup (talk) 06:08, 27 February 2008 (UTC)
added. --Hm2k (talk) 17:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Popularity -> ranking

Perhaps using some site ranking service would be a better way to measure popularity than user or project count.

This page: Comparison_of_wiki_farms

Uses Alexa for ranking and seems to create good results —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.75.226.154 (talk) 17:59, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Web hosting, wiki

Although I don't know exactly what web-hosting and wiki mean in the table, I don't think Launchpad should be classified as Yes in web-hosting and wiki. It seems launchpad can just link to homepage and wiki. They don't host them. Could somebody please do some clarification? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.119.146.1 (talk) 07:02, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

Google Hosting is missing

As noted above (back in 2006), this is an obvious omission: Google Hosting --NealMcB (talk)

It's not missing, it's called Google Code. --Hm2k (talk) 09:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

bzr

What about Bazaar / Launchpad.net ? --220.244.61.150 11:15, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


We do need a section about bazaar. Bazaar is a different type of source management that Launchpad.net uses. JoshTime (talk) 16:47, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

License Status

Is it possible to add license status of the hosting facility itself? For example, SourceForge is proprietary and Launchpad is released under AGPL. 118.168.114.231 (talk) 20:30, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

Comparison of open source software hosting facilities → Comparison of open-source software hosting facilities — like Open-source software — Neustradamus (✉) 18:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)

Discussion moved to Talk:List of free and open source software packages#Requested move. Jafeluv (talk) 16:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:List of free and open source software packages which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 16:00, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Consider adding repo.or.cz

http://repo.or.cz/ appears to be one of the oldest Git hosting sites around and is pretty popular for hosting development branches of official projects, e.g. of QEMU. Cf. http://git.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/GitHosting Andreasfa (talk) 12:44, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

What does Personal / Private branch mean ?

What does Personal / Private branch mean within the context of source repository? How is it different from a regular branch which most version control systems provide?

Is it aka having a hidden (not publicly viewable) version of the source code. If so, isn't this against the philosophy of OSS? Can someone post a link to relevant documentation by a hosting provider who provides such a functionality. For example, the current state of this page lists Tigris.org providing such functionality. But I could not locate any Tigris official documentation which could hint that such a thing exists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.186.101 (talk) 06:08, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Google Code Translation Service?

The comparison chart states that Google Code has a translation service, which I assume refers to a web-based interface for doing translations (like Launchpad's Rosetta); however I can find no mention of it on the Google Code website or anywhere else. If this refers to integration with Transifex or some third-party system, as opposed to being built-in, then that should be stated 18.242.6.52 (talk) 06:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Countries blocked from access

I've added a couple of columns to list countries blocked from accessing or contributing to hosted code. Given that restrictions like these may contravene the FOSS licenses of the software projects hosted by the sites on the comparison page, I think it's important that this information should be included. I've provided the details for SourceForge and Google Code. Would be very grateful for more contributions! zazpot (talk) 00:42, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

No FOSS license requires that you distribute your program to anyone, so are not impacted by these bans. See: Desert Island test 128.189.242.70 (talk) 22:18, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm tempted to remove these columns all together as it's not a feature. --Hm2k (talk) 14:02, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

New column to feature table: Private repositories

Recently, Bitbucket started providing unlimited private repositories and you are able to share your private repositories with a maximum of 5 other users. I believe this is a great feature since you don't always want to publish your project right away from the beggining. You can start it in private and when appropriate release it for the community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.29.97.190 (talk) 15:04, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Codaset

Codaset needs to be added to the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Memolipd (talk • contribs) 14:11, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Services that allow authors to profit from ads / donations

I suggest stating which services allow authors to profit from their open source programs. -109.67.201.158 (talk) 10:11, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

"Team" category?

What does the "Team" category mean? What features does a site need to have to put a "Yes" in this column? Pfussell (talk) 22:28, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It isn't that clear. I see SourceForge has No for team, yet i know you can have multiple members and stuff all on one project and code repository. J. B. Dix (talk) 17:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Notability

Please do not add or change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you.
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
--Hm2k (talk) 17:21, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Reviewed the notability guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability, but they clearly state that notability guidelines apply to the creation of articles and not their content. So I'm going to go ahead and add another entry in the list. Highspam (talk) 14:53, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
I agree, but must expand this, to cover the whole notion: notability applies to the topics of articles, not entries within an article. Claims added to an article do need to be supported by independent reliable source(s), and can be augmented by primary sources. --Lexein (talk) 15:21, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Suggest reverting revision [15:50, 24 June 2011]

The revision comment is "drop list entries without articles per WP:SAL". In fact, if you review the selection criteria in WP:SAL, nowhere does it mention any notability requirements for list entries. The Wikipedia article on notability specifically states "[notability guidelines] do not directly limit the content of an article or list." The selection criteria mention notability as a common selection criteria but, since this is not mentioned on the discussion page nor in the lead section of the list, it does not apply to this list. Notability guidelines for a Wikipedia article do not apply to entries in lists. Highspam (talk) 23:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

What selection criteria would you suggest instead? - MrOllie (talk) 03:29, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
All available ?  :) Highspam (talk) 21:25, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
We can't really just include "all available", because all claims in Wikipedia articles must be verifiable, and articles must not consist entirely of primary sourced (first party) material. I'm a strong proponent of inclusion of material which is independently reliably sourced - after that, primary sources can be used to support details. The word "notable" was mentioned above, but notability is quite explicitly not about the inclusion of content in articles, only the inclusion of articles themselves. For claims, only verifiability, and the reliability of sources matter.
About that diff, I would support restoring any entries supported by 1 independent RS. This is not an onerous burden; most repositories have been discussed in RS. Many sources which appear unreliable at first glance (blogs) can be rehabilitated by researching the author's other publications and frequency of citation in other RS. Example: WP:WikiProject IRC/Sources). --Lexein (talk) 08:33, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello? --Lexein (talk) 15:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Obvious followup: I'm seeing a revert war going on, claiming that any entries must have "an article", but there has been no explicit consensus about this above. Seems to me that any claim added, as long as it is supported with an inline citation of an independent reliable source with additional support from the primary source (the vendor), should be just fine to add. I mean, RS is RS. No? --Lexein (talk) 15:25, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Has something with an independnent reliable source been removed? If so, I did it in error. - MrOllie (talk) 15:47, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
I suppose I'm advocating 3 things: adding {{citation needed}} for 7 days or more before deletion, saying See Talk in the edit summary with a reminder of the need for independent sourcing (and the impending deletion), and stating the actual inclusion criteria for this list, per WP:LIST. --Lexein (talk) 19:52, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Reliable source for what? Sources are required for any fact that is challenged or likely to be challenged. So independent reliable sources are definitely needed to verify popularity, because that changes often and is subject to abuse. Aside from popularity, though, what facts might be challenged? Are you saying that every feature listed for every hosting provider should have a source? That's simply not possible.

I don't mean to offend here, but I think we're being a bit over-zealous in our attempts at applying the Wikipedia rules here. I think the list would be far more useful if we include all hosting providers available. Since the total number of these is fairly low (less than 25, it seems), the list does not suffer if we include all possible hosters. Contrast this with, for instance, lists of bands or people, where the list would suffer greatly from not enforcing any notability guidelines (due to dilution of notable entries). Contrast with a list of people who have had sex with Kevin Bacon, where independent reliable sources would be strictly necessary for the list to be accurate. You wouldn't expect to see reliable sources on a list of people (you don't need a source to confirm that someone is a person), nor would you expect to see notability guidelines applied to a list of coin sizes currently manufactured by the US Mint (though, due to the large number of commemorative coins, you would expect to have it apply to a list of all coins ever manufactured by the mint, in which case the list should be called List of Notable Coins Manufactured by the US Mint). Neither Notability nor Verifiability are needed for this list at this time. If we go from less than 2 dozen hosting providers to hundreds of them, then Notability will need to be enforced, in which case the article will need to be renamed to reflect that fact.
Highspam (talk) 18:38, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

GitHub forks and gists shouldn't count

Github's project count are off by a large margin, because most are forks. Many forks don't add anything and are outdated. Many of the forks that do add something never pull-request and thus are never merged into the "morally central" repositories, which means they're either customizations, personal attempts, feature testing, etc. The repositories may share commits, so this count means nothing about how much data a service is handling either. Gists are counting as repositories too, and they count for about 45% (https://github.com/blog/841-those-are-some-big-numbers), but gist it's just a versioned pastebin. 193.136.128.7 (talk) 22:42, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree that the repositories number should not be used for number of projects. But github doesn't seem to publish any other number. Not sure what to do, perhaps using the page you linked as reference is a first step. 213.100.90.101 (talk) 18:20, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
A bit over one million "projects" only have one follower (presumably, the user that forked). This could help create an estimate of non-project forks.--200.83.246.105 (talk) 11:27, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Following the description in the search page, it's possible to count the public non-forks and forks (note: I executed these searches while logged out to include only public repositories). Browsing the gists page gives us the latest public gist number, and it's an excelent estimate because all gists are numbered sequentially, whether public, anonymous or private. The total number of repositories given in the homepage is greater than the sum of these because it includes private repositories, so if you subtract the sum from the total, you can estimate the number of private repositories. I've updated the article with some of this information and respective references. Please remove this topic whenever you feel comfortable about it. 193.136.128.7 (talk) 21:46, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
BTW, I've scrapped through BitBucket's search page and I've summed up each listed repository and its respective forks, and the result was 94559. However, this would be original research. If anyone cares to try it and host the result, here's the code I've used (requires Emacs and Wget): bitbucket.el. Running simultaneously from two machines a dozen miles apart and in different networks gave the same count. 193.136.128.7 (talk) 23:11, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Needed: definition of attributes/features in section "Features"

In section Features, a definition of what is meant by each of these attributes/features would be welcome for clarity. --Mortense (talk) 08:11, 18 February 2012 (UTC)

Add Allura

SourceForge's Allura (FOSS) platform is missing. 190.50.102.241 (talk) 21:36, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

What is "Code Hosting"?

What does Code Hosting mean? Doesn't every site on this list host your code? Isn't that the point? --Astronouth7303 (talk) 16:55, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

Erm...ya, I never really saw that column, what is it doing there anyways? One of them says 'yes' but is yellow, I'm not sure what that's about. Highspam (talk) 16:11, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that too. It has no place on this page. And if they aren't "Yes", the entries should definitely not be on that page. Jeshan (talk) 04:44, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

Suggest removing "Popularity" Section

Most of the information in the "Popularity" section is dated, difficult to verify, incorrect, or missing. I suggest we update it with verifiable references or remove it completely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.218.106.250 (talk) 05:36, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

I think that removing the entire section is definitely unneccessary: Facts like "Prominent projects" or "Alexa rank" can be easily verified. However, we could probably remove columns like "Teams", "Branches" and "Bug reports" as those are mostly empty. --91.114.191.180 (talk) 12:46, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
I have just removed those three columns (PS: the previous comment was made by me when I was not logged in) --Marko Knoebl (talk) 23:58, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Reading this table

What's the difference between a green "Yes" and a yellow "Yes"? What do the colors mean?

What does "outside" mean in the footnotes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.163.72.2 (talk) 22:02, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I believe it means yes, but it's provided outside of the service. While a normal green yes means it's provided inside. If this can be made clearer, feel free to do so. --Hm2k (talk) 10:32, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
Doesn't really mean anything. Google Code is said to support web hosting and mailing lists "outside" of its service. By the same token, doesn't every service support every feature if not "inside" then "outside"? I would like to change those two yellow "Yes" boxes to "No" unless I am opposed. Oktal (talk) 20:30, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

C*AN?

Places like CPAN, CTAN, CRAN, and whatever the java one is called - do we want to list those here? Ojw 17:37, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Clearly they should be listed, as should be RForge and R-forge and RForge.

Kjetil B Halvorsen 13:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kjetil1001 (talk • contribs)

The kind of question this article should answer

Suppose I have a module that I wanted to release under the GPL, and I wouldn't want to hand over the copyright to someone else or something similar (like SourceForge), and it wouldn't be appropriate for limited scope websites or websites with per-project approval regimes (like Savannah), where do I go? Isn't answering questions like that that the whole point of this article? Shinobu (talk) 13:45, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds like something that people reading this article would want to know.
So I added a sentence at the start of this article stating that every one of the sites listed here -- including SourceForge -- you retain copyright of all the code you write.
Does that answer that question?
Today the Sourceforge "terms of use" says "PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU RETAIN OWNERSHIP OF ANY COPYRIGHTS, ... IN ANY CONTENT YOU SUBMIT."
May I ask why Shinobu thought a writer might need to hand over the copyright to someone else at SourceForge or any other site? --DavidCary (talk) 15:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

Berlios effectively closing

"The reorientation and associated closure of the highly frequented development platform for April, 30th 2014 makes it necessary to migrate the on berliOS hosted projects to other platforms." http://developer.berlios.de/forum/forum.php?forum_id=39220 MarkMLl (talk) 13:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Bogus 'prominent' emulator projects

Someone seems to have added a bunch of non-prominent emulators to the list of prominent projects. The lists must therefore be considered a complete subjective fantasy. Someone should at least make an effort to find some top-ranked projects (#downloads, pagerank, etc.) instead of just putting their favorites in here. I write this as the author of a 'prominent' emulator project which is !LOL! not prominent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.115.137.86 (talk) 09:42, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Github blocked in Russia and India

According to the Github article, Github has been blocked in India and Russia. Unless the block has now been removed, the article/references should be updated to reflect this. GoBusto (talk) 08:52, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

No mainframe tools?

There do not appear to be any mainframe products here. Is source code storage/control only relevant on LUW? DEddy (talk) 18:17, 9 January 2015 (UTC)

General Overview add programming language?

In the general overview I would like to add a column Programming Language / Language written in (naming?) This is especially useful in-case of open-source projects e.g. when you want to contribute or setup your own instance, etc. However to keep the colum numbers small I would like to move Manager in Name, ie:

Name (Manager) Established Notes Countries blocked Programming Language Runs on all free software Ad-free
Alioth (Debian Project) 2003 Preference for Debian related projects PHP Yes Yes

Thoughts? Wikiinger (talk) 01:02, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

For me the language in which the webservice is programmed in is not importand enought to include it in this table. --Txt.file (talk) 11:45, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes ShalokShalom (talk) 13:01, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

Robots.txt protocols

add to the table somewhere about some kind of general or unique robots/crawlers operation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.67.177.42 (talk) 19:33, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Why is this called "Comparison of open-source software hosting facilities"?

Actually this is a list about various source control version hosting facilities. Neither do they all run on open-source software nor are they exclusive to open-source software. So I don't see why there is an "open-source" in title? Wikiinger (talk) 00:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

[x] Done Wikiinger (talk) 14:07, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
Actually the 'software' in "Comparison of source code software hosting facilities" is also superfluously, since:
  1. this list doesn't relate to software, but to hosting facilities,
  2. the hosting cannot be only used for software source code, but for any kind of (source) code, e.g. web pages.
Wikiinger (talk) 23:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
[x] Fixed Wikiinger (talk) 00:06, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Please start Comparison of collaborative development environments

. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.245.53.33 (talk) 04:48, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

general category article

Is there an article that discusses the general category of the kind of things listed in this "Comparison of source code hosting facilities" article? Many Wikipedia articles use the phrase "web-based project-management and collaboration" or the phrase "source code hosting". I want to to improve those articles by making that phrase in those articles, and in the introduction to this "Comparison of source code hosting facilities" article, link or redirect to an article about that general category.

I suppose all these things could be considered a kind of shared web hosting service or free web hosting service (or both?), but my understanding is that this particular sub-category is notable enough for its own article. --DavidCary (talk) 16:53, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

GitLab is open source

Could anyone explain why GitLab Community Edition is not marked as free software? It's published on terms of MIT license. Deetah (talk) 14:28, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I found a good source and corrected this Stefan Nagy (talk) 14:52, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Apache Allura is missing

Apache Allura indicates it includes git management — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.165.245.13 (talk) 11:33, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Repeated Deletion of entries

There has been repeated deletion of entries without justification. Editors cite WP:GNG and WP:NOTDIR, however, these policies are being misapplied to lists. Some entries already have articles on Wikipedia (for example Deveo), and if notability is called into question, WP:FAILN should be employed. As mentioned in previous discussions here, lists may contain entries with questionable notability, "Non-notable topics with closely related notable articles or lists are often merged into those pages". YetAnotherAlias (talk) 13:25, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

I'm fine with waiting until the AFD on Deveo is completed to remove it. - MrOllie (talk) 14:14, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Note: This issue has now been resolved. See Talk:List of tools for code review for details. FleetCommand (Speak your mind!) 17:33, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Tesarius

In table General information column Server side: all free software
What does it mean? All features or only based, enought for basic common tasks?
For example, in Microsoft Visual Studio Team Services Most of functions and features are absolute free for teams, which consists no more than 5 members [1]

You can follow the link to read about Free software. Free as in libre, not gratis. Greenman (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

In table Features column Shell server
What does it mean? SSH?

Yes, presumably. See [3] - each of those claims should be referenced so as to allow followup. Greenman (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Visual Studio Team Services Pricing". www.visualstudio.com.

Large number of hosting services removed with no explanation

I added two sites to the "Specialized hosting facilities" section. The sites both focus on R packages, similar to Drupal.org's hosting of Drupal modules. However, both sites were subsequently removed with no explanation, and then the same user removed 17 other sites (from other parts of the same page) with little explanation. Is there a specific objection I could address? Kenahoo (talk) 18:57, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

They removed entries without an article. Most list/comparison-type articles only include entries that have an article, otherwise the list gets unmanageable with no criteria for what's added (see WP:WTAF). But it should really be listed on the page that this is the case. Greenman (talk) 19:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Write the article first is not policy, it is an opinion; and it is misapplied in this case. ALso "One of the main distinctions between lists and article categories in that lists may contain non-notable entries". Deletions have made Wikipedia less useful. GangofOne (talk) 23:42, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
It's a perfectly acceptable inclusion criteria, especially when no other has been offered that I've noticed. --Ronz (talk) 20:28, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comparison of source code hosting facilities. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:24, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Gogs

Is this far enough developed, in order to include it: http://gogs.io/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShalokShalom (talk • contribs) 13:02, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

But Gogs is a git server and not a source code hosting facility. I think Gogs rather belong in the Git_(software)#Git_server section. --Zonkmachine (talk) 02:53, 11 April 2015 (UTC)
That is a misunderstanding, Zonkmachine. Gogs calls itself the “Go Git Service”, and it clearly falls into the same category of tools as, say, GitLab because both have drawn a lot of inspiration from GitHub. So of course they are all source code hosting facilities and should enter the comparison. --ChPietsch (talk) 12:30, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comparison of source code hosting facilities. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:50, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Status of Tigris.org

Tigris.org should removed from this comparison due to the unclear and irrelevant state of it as a service. They have not been accepting new projects since 2014 and the last update posted on their blog was in 2013, making Tigris.org basically irrelevant to this comparison in 2017 since on one can start a new project there. I'm not entirely sure what CollabNet or the admins are doing with the site, but right now it looks like its completely dead.

GKarastergios (talk) 23:53, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Comparison of source code hosting facilities. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:05, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Old Content For Github

Github uses Github Desktop as a CDE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richienb (talk • contribs) 08:27, 31 May 2018 (UTC)

Tuleap should be added

Tuleap (project management) should be included in this list. It's available with support; or do-it-yourself with the free sources. GregRundlett (talk) 21:44, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

possible additions

Software or instances

The table seems currently focused on software, while it's interesting to compare the main instances running it as well, for instance there are several GitLab, Gogs and Savannah instances open to projects. One list on Reddit is a good starting point but I'm not sure how/whether to reference it in external links or otherwise. Nemo 16:33, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

User counts

I have asked Gitlab.com to provide more recent user counts. On IRC they originally declined, pointing me to press@gitlab.com, which I contacted, waiting for feedback. I also noticed that the source for the Github numbers is not clear at all, and made that more obvious in the article. More generally, one has to wonder how relevant is the number of users - the number of *active* users would be more important - it's one of the reasons why Gitlab declined to share their numbers, as they felt it would be disengenuous. --TheAnarcat (talk) 16:34, 28 July 2016 (UTC)


It is possible to get information of 3,584,105 users from https://gitlab.com/api/v4/users/ API endpoint and information of 1,044,288 public projects from https://gitlab.com/api/v4/projects API endpoint, now. As the current number of GitLab users is seemed to be retrieved by a similar method (it is said to retrieved at 2017-03-25 from "GitLab.com") and is completely out of date (due to the grate migration after Microsoft's acquisition of GitHub #movingtogitlab ), could it be updated without any other reference? --Hadi sfr (talk) 01:59, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Jurisdiction of each service

It would be very interesting if somebody could determine the controlling jurisdiction applicable to each of the services. As a particular example, Sourceforge declines to serve projects to Cuba at the behest of the US government, and I think it would be useful if that could be made explicit. MarkMLl (talk) 13:28, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

I agree, and I think this is very important - most of the sites listed here deny services to developers who happen to live in one of the countries on the current "hate list" of the US government. It's a major omission of the article which urgently needs to be fixed, ideally by the addition of an extra column to the "General Information" table. Longitude2 (talk) 09:17, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

What Determines Inclusion/Exclusion of Products?

New to Wikipedia here, what criteria do y'all use to decide whether or not to include a specific product? I'm surprised Perforce is not listed in this article. If that's intentional, why?
--MerlinRedbeard (talk) 17:52, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Entries here need to be notable and have their own article. See WP:NOTABILITY. Greenman (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

That is incorrect. Entries in this list do not need to have their own article. To quote from WP:NOTABILITY: "These guidelines only outline how suitable a topic is for its own article or list. They do not limit the content of an article or list" (Emphasis in original). Notability can be used as a criterion for inclusion in some kinds of list, the example given being lists of a school's alumni, where obviously it is appropriate. Longitude2 (talk) 11:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

GitHub in Iran and Cuba

According to this page,

"GitHub Enterprise Server may not be sold to, exported, or re-exported to any country listed in Country Group E:1 in Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR or to the Crimea region of Ukraine. This list currently contains Cuba, Iran, North Korea, and Syria, but is subject to change."

However, the situation is different with Cloud services:

"With respect to Iran, however, GitHub now has a license from the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) to provide cloud services to developers located or otherwise resident in that country. GitHub cloud services, both free and paid, are also generally available to developers located in Cuba."

Hence developers in Iran and Cuba can use GitHub cloud services.

7zz (talk) 19:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Berlios has mercurial support

according to http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/MercurialHosting

Is xmlbasedsrs a prominent project?

This project seems dead from the 2003. You can call it prominent? The only traffic in its mailing list is spam: http://xmlbasedsrs.tigris.org/ds/viewForums.do

Launchpad forums?

As far as I know the Launchpad doesn't offer forum functionality. They have Answers which is a knowledge base type thing.

New column to feature table: Knowledge base

Some hosting facilities provide a knowledge base. For example Lauchpad has Answers.

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Comparison_of_source-code-hosting_facilities/Archive_1&oldid=1128134947"