Re: [Repo-criteria-discuss] Fwd: Re: repo-criteria-evaluation

[Zak Rogoff]

On 04/28/2016 01:57 PM, Aaron Wolf wrote:
> On 04/28/2016 04:19 AM, address@hidden wrote:
>> On 2016-04-28 04:00, Mike Gerwitz wrote:
>>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 18:37:28 +0100, address@hidden wrote:
>>>> sure:
>>>> https://github.com/blog/2146-organizations-can-now-block-abusive-users
>>>>
>>>> "This feature allows project owners to block users, and prevents blocked
>>>> users from opening or commenting on issues or pull requests, forking
>>>> repositories, and adding or editing wiki pages."
>>>
>>> Okay, so this is in a per-user basis.
>>>
>>> Personally, if I'm understanding this correctly, I think that's
>>> okay---GNU project maintainers are free to block abusive users.  I can
>>> see how it might be abused, but this isn't indiscriminate blocking.
>>>
>>>> The really important thing though is making people aware that
>>>> sourceforge
>>>> has inserted malware into peoples programs. Including the GIMP
>>>> installer I
>>>> think.
>>>
>>> Are they still doing that today, though?
>>>
>>> I agree with Yui Hirasawa---they've come under new management, and
>>> unless they're still doing it today, I think we don't have much choice
>>> but to see what happens next; they've expressed desire to stop those bad
>>> practices.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Mike Gerwitz
>>> Free Software Hacker | GNU Maintainer & Volunteer
>>> https://mikegerwitz.com
>>> FSF Member #5804 | GPG Key ID: 0x8EE30EAB
>>
>> I don't know what you mean. Yui Hirasawa is cartoon character from "K-ON".
>>
>> are our emails part of some wider discussion I am not seeing?
>>
> 
> Yui (regardless of real name or whatever) is right. Sourceforge was
> acquired by new owners who published an announcement rejecting all the
> shittiness of the past owners and promising to do things right. I
> suspect they would even be possibly on par with GitLab in being open to
> actively working with us toward passing the core criteria. I hope
> someone reaches out to them.
> 
> It would definitely be inappropriate to use the past history of
> shittiness to give Sourceforge any extra bad marks in our review at this
> point (especially since the concerns aren't directly related to the
> criteria).
> 
> 

Reaching out to SF about helping them move up in the criteria would be
great right now. I bet they are especially likely to work with us. Who
can reach out to them?

-- 
Zak Rogoff // Campaigns Manager
Free Software Foundation

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature