SourceForge is a software discovery platform featuring over 4000 thousand software categories and over 600,000 software listings. Businesses and individuals looking to buy or download software can visit SourceForge to compare software, read reviews, and learn about the software choices available to them. Developers use SourceForge to upload code and software to SourceForge’s open source directory. With verified user reviews, SourceForge is used by software companies and software developers to…
GIT is good to be used for faster and high availability operations during code release cycle. Git provides a complete replica of the repository on the developer's local system which is why every developer will have complete repository available for quick access on his system and they can merge the specific branches that they have worked on back to the centralized repository. The limitations with GIT are seen when checking in large files.
I recommend SourceForge to anyone or business that needs both commercial and open source software. This platform has a wide variety of software with many categories that allow easy search for any project, in addition to the fact that searches can be done separately (commercial and open source software) so as not to have mixed results which go with different purpose. In addition to the fact that the community of this platform is quite active and that there are always times to discover new projects that can be useful for a company or individual person.
The overall design that SourceForge has really leaves a lot to be desired, although the entire platform works perfectly, I think that the design should be much more attractive.
There is currently no feature to save your progress on a review you are writing, so if you are writing a review and the browser is closed for some reason, all progress of the written review will be lost.
Git has met all standards for a source control tool and even exceeded those standards. Git is so integrated with our work that I can't imagine a day without it.
Souceforge was very straightforward and easy to manage. The leads worked for us so there is not a lot else to say about why I'd use it again. This isn't some complicated software product, it is a simple inbound marketing channel that is meant to generate leads and help us with brand awareness and it did exactly that.
SourceForge offers so many features for a technology review platform. They have some really unique ones that let potential new customers search for your product in really personalized and innovative ways. When you first load the edit screen, it may be a bit overwhelming at first because there are so many customizable fields, but their documentation and support is good and each field provides a ton of value.
We've never had any issues or downtime with SourceForge. Since we've been a user, the platform has never been down. Or at least never that I've noticed.
SourceForge loads extremely quickly whether you're using the front end or administrating your product listing on the back end. All pages are snappy to load--no issues with page speed whatsoever.
I am not sure what the official Git support channels are like as I have never needed to use any official support. Because Git is so popular among all developers now, it is pretty easy to find the answer to almost any Git question with a quick Google search. I've never had trouble finding what I'm looking for.
I hardly ever use the support on SourceForge, as I have not needed it. Their product works well for me. One time I had to email them and they got back to me the same day, but that's my only experience.
When we first signed up, they pair you with a campaign manager who trained us on how to use the product properly. The product is simple so the training was only about 30 minutes and after that we understood all the features and how to make the most of it. Most of the work came with making a custom landing page and building a follow up process for our sales team.
Easy to setup, we just needed to update our page and send them UTM tracking links. Most of the effort came with setting up our follow up process for our sales team.
I've used both Apache Subversion & Git over the years and have maintained my allegiance to Git. Git is not objectively better than Subversion. It's different. The key difference is that it is decentralized. With Subversion, you have a problem here: The SVN Repository may be in a location you can't reach (behind a VPN, intranet - etc), you cannot commit. If you want to make a copy of your code, you have to literally copy/paste it. With Git, you do not have this problem. Your local copy is a repository, and you can commit to it and get all benefits of source control. When you regain connectivity to the main repository, you can commit against it. Another thing for consideration is that Git tracks content rather than files. Branches are lightweight and merging is easy, and I mean really easy. It's distributed, basically every repository is a branch. It's much easier to develop concurrently and collaboratively than with Subversion, in my opinion. It also makes offline development possible. It doesn't impose any workflow, as seen on the above linked website, there are many workflows possible with Git. A Subversion-style workflow is easily mimicked.
G2 has a larger commitment time upfront and for a more expensive rate, which wasn't the best option for our team as we were just exploring the resources that existed out there at the time. We preferred Sourceforge as well due to its subscription service, making it easier to commit from the start.
SourceForge has been plenty scalable for us. Our marketing department is able to edit listings and our executives can also log in to the platform if need be for leads and reporting information. SourceForge offers multiple user access and role permissions, so it's pretty scalable and easy to use for our entire team.
Git has saved our organization countless hours having to manually trace code to a breaking change or manage conflicting changes. It has no equal when it comes to scalability or manageability.
Git has allowed our engineering team to build code reviews into its workflow by preventing a developer from approving or merging in their own code; instead, all proposed changes are reviewed by another engineer to assess the impact of the code and whether or not it should be merged in first. This greatly reduces the likelihood of breaking changes getting into production.
Git has at times created some confusion among developers about what to do if they accidentally commit a change they decide later they want to roll back. There are multiple ways to address this problem and the best available option may not be obvious in all cases.
