Software Freedom Conservancy Votes To Accept Sourceware.org

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Software Freedom Conservancy Votes To Accept Sourceware.org

For the past two decades Red Hat has been behind Sourceware.org for providing hosting for open-source projects like Cygwin, GNU GCC, GDB, Glibc, and many other projects. While Red Hat continues to sponsor the hosting and having their employees be involved with the Sourceware.org maintenance, etc, for ensuring a secured future they have been looking to hookup with the Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC). The SFC has now voted in favor of accepting this long-time open-source hosting service into their umbrella...

https://www.phoronix.com/news/SFC-Sourceware-Votes

[timofonic]

Good news. I think they should add an interface more similar to GitHub/GitLab. Their website looks very 90s. Bugzilla and gitweb?

[Vistaus]

Good news. I think they should add an interface more similar to GitHub/GitLab. Their website looks very 90s. Bugzilla and gitweb?

No thank you. Out of all the things you mentioned, I like GitHub's interface the best, but the 90's look of this site looks really good to me as well. Clean, fast, no schmuck. Just as supposed to be.

[alexvoda]

I expected GNU GCC to use GNU Savannah on FSF infrastructure. I wonder how GNU projects being hosted by SFC will influence the relationship between FSF and SFC.

[RahulSundaram]

I expected GNU GCC to use GNU Savannah on FSF infrastructure. I wonder how GNU projects being hosted by SFC will influence the relationship between FSF and SFC.

A number of core GNU projects have very little direct association with FSF anymore and are largely maintained and hosted by large organizations. Look up things like EGCS fork, Glibc committee issues etc for some of the history here.

[rogerx]

The name SFC gives me cold chills.

For some reason, reminds me of Microsoft's reknown sfc scan tool. Using the sfc scan tool is common advice, and implied to solve all of their Window's secretive product licensing/key operating system blocking tactics.

Think I prefer Gitlab, versus Github.

[mb_q]

The name SFC gives me cold chills.
Think I prefer Gitlab, versus Github.

To begin with, GitHub is fully proprietary, and also probably* massively violates licenses of hosted open source projects by selling GPLed code & white-labelling other codes after laundering it through generative language models with their "co-pilot" service.

* yet to be tested legally, but at least this is an interpretation SFC supports https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2022/...github-launch/

[rogerx]

To begin with, GitHub is fully proprietary, and also probably* massively violates licenses of hosted open source projects by selling GPLed code & white-labelling other codes after laundering it through generative language models with their "co-pilot" service.

* yet to be tested legally, but at least this is an interpretation SFC supports https://sfconservancy.org/blog/2022/...github-launch/

Testing my bad grammar here, I couldn't agree more!

As to why people have flocked to github is beyond me.

On the flip, could it just be a mass migration of present and former MS employees being allowed github profiles? An interesting analogy, likely wasn't bought by Microsoft, as github was already owned by Microsoft?

On another similar related conflict, over the past years, developers have also pretty well mangled the wonderfully working simplistic Unix/Linux one-click copy-paste algorithm, while attempting to simulate Microsoft Windows' pain in the arse copy paste procedure.

[onlyLinuxLuvUBack]

The name SFC gives me cold chills.

For some reason, reminds me of Microsoft's reknown sfc scan tool. Using the sfc scan tool is common advice, and implied to solve all of their Window's secretive product licensing/key operating system blocking tactics.

Think I prefer Gitlab, versus Github.

You meant codeberg ( hosted in the EU , protected from evil us corps and AI )