SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the this-is-not-the-host-you-are-looking-for... dept.
Google, or someone using their hosting service, noted that SourceForge had established a mirror to the official GIMP-for-Windows site and were now offering downloads which contained adware:
It appears that +SourceForge took over the control of the 'GIMP for Windows' account and is now distributing an ads-enabled installer of GIMP. They also locked out original owner of the account, Jernej Simončič, who has been building the Windows versions of GIMP for our project for years.
So far they haven't replied to provide explanations. Therefore, we remind you again that GIMP only provides builds for Windows via its official Downloads page.
SourceForge's mirrored sites facility is described thus:
The Open Source Mirror Directory is an extension to our existing software directory, where we'll be mirroring projects that are not hosted on SourceForge, and SourceForge projects that have been abandoned.
The problem, though, is that GIMP-for-Windows is not an abandoned project, but moved from SourceForge to Google because the writers "had concerns about the presence of misleading third-party ads on SourceForge".
SourceForge has responded, acknowledging that Gimp-Win had abandoned SourceForge due to misleading ads and claim "They were not alone in those concerns — we were also concerned — leading us to establish a program to enable users and developers to help us remove misleading and confusing ads." They also admit "Mirrored projects are sometimes used to deliver easy-to-decline third-party offers..." which suggests that they have merely changed the way that they deliver their ads - but not necessarily the ad's content. So, some might say, they've rectified the situation by providing both misleading ads and misleading hosting.
SourceForge also say "Since our change to mirror GIMP-Win, we have received no requests by the original author to resume use of this project. We welcome further discussion about how SourceForge can best serve the GIMP-Win author." Perhaps letting the writer choose where he hosts his project would be a good place to start.
Sourceforge hijacks GIMP For Windows project, adds malware to downloads
SourceForge (SF) has taken over control of the GIMP for Windows SF project and is now distributing an adware/malwared installer for GIMP. They also locked out the maintainer, Jernej Simončiči. Sourceforge claims it was "abandoned" and they're providing a service by "mirroring" the original, though it's unclear how much value malware adds for the end user, rather than for SF. (This comes two years after SF claiming its malware was just "misunderstood".)
Since being busted, SF is now serving an .exe that matches that at the official download site.
Other projects recently hijacked by SF include many Apache projects (Allura, Derby, Directory Studio, the Apache HTTP server, Hadoop, OpenOffice, Solr, and Subversion); Mozilla Firefox, Thunderbird, and FireFTP; Evolution and Open-Xchange; Drupal and WordPress; Eclipse, Aptana, Komodo, MonoDevelop, and NetBeans; VLC, Audacious, Banshee.fm, Helix, and Tomahawk media players; and many others.
[Editor's Comment: First Submission and 2nd Submission. Submissions significantly edited before publication]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by janrinok on Friday May 29 2015, @08:24AM
The summary should be just that - a factual summary of the story under discussion. It doesn't matter who submits it - it shouldn't contain personal views to any significant extent. It shouldn't have a particular bias, it should be balanced and it should be fair. It should also provoke thought and further discussion. The place for all personal views is in the comments. Now, everyone has some bias when they write a story and we do not attempt to remove every nuance. The submitter has made an effort to submit a story and that should be respected. However, the editors are supposed to be removing the majority of the personal views and ensuring that the story that hits the front page is as fair as we can make it. If you really want to get the personal viewpoint, please read the comments.
The reason that we now provide a link at all is because I made an edit but some felt that I had not provided a balanced and fair story. The submitter believes that I had put words into his mouth. I made an error and I have apologised for that. That does not imply that every other story over the last 15 months or so has been incorrectly edited, or that there is anything substantially wrong with our procedures. It was simply a human error. Nevertheless, I believe that this site should continue to offer intelligent stories in a fair and balanced way to provide material for discussion by the community. If you think that the site should be something different then you will need to start pushing for major changes to our long term vision, goals and aspirations all of which have been expressed in great detail on this site.