Comment by phantomathkg
1 year ago
Disagree. Unfortunately Forge is not a well known category defining term. Using it as a tagline defying the purposes to popularize Forgego.
1 year ago
Disagree. Unfortunately Forge is not a well known category defining term. Using it as a tagline defying the purposes to popularize Forgego.
Yet when posts online described it as an alternative/clone of GitHub/gitlab/gitea it was alsa received with criticism and complains that "what if I don't know what gitea is".
Naming and creating descriptions is not trivial, I wish more complaints would also simply come with proposals of better taglines, so we can bash those ideas quickly in comments and cut that long feedback loop.
Disagree. SourceForge was established in 1999. The term "software forge" was in widespread use, until Github started gaining mainstream attention. But the term "hub" doesn't necessarily always refer to the same thing - e.g. certain adult entertainment website is also using it.
> SourceForge was established in 1999. The term "software forge" was in widespread use...
Not trying to be contentious, but I've got a 5-digit slashdot ID and I've never heard that phrase explicitly used in my entire life as a term of art by software devs, including at or around 1999.
Definitely not saying that nobody was using the term, but "widespread use" is a big claim that requires some substantiation. It absolutely does not align with my lived experience of the time.
Funny that you mention /., I just mentioned it in another comment. Sourceforge bought /. and advertise there heavily - I very much associate the two.
I’ve got a three digit id (/. user number 404!) and I agree.
Also five digit /. id, and I would like to remind grandparent and upvoters that 1999 was a long fucking time ago. There are senior programmers who weren’t born in 1999! Why the fuck would they know about Sourceforge? Was it on a special episode of the Backyardigans?
"Software forge" has a certain explanatory ring to it, but approximately nobody has any clue what SourceForge is, or even less, what it represented back in its heyday. The kids know github, many don't even know the difference between github and git, or slighly less concerning, assume git is a tool from github.
You're objectively wrong in this case - look at all the comments in this thread. Clearly "forge" is not a well known category defining term.
It very much used to be, before Github delivered where SourceForge couldn't (and still doesn't). But the history is still written in project names like GForge, FusionForge; and of course the contemporary SourceHut refers to itself as a "hacker's forge".
I know whatever's written in Wikipedia doesn't necessarily have to be authoritative, but it's worth to check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forge_(software)#History
Defining itself as simply an alternative to the mainstream is a not a great way to makes its own identity.
Imagine if Fedora presented itself as simply “an open source alternative to windows”.
Sure, that might be easier to understand for those less in the field, but really doesn’t help it’s own identity.