Advanced Open Source Project Hosting?

asn0 asks: "How do large/popular Open Source/Free Software projects manage their needs for hosting, bandwidth and mirrors? What limitations are there to the size/popularity of projects a site like SourceForge can/will support? Where does a project go for hosting and bandwidth once it out-grows SourceForge, and how hard is it to get hosting, bandwidth and mirrors to support a growing open source project?"

Sponsorship

[jonsb]

I have a small web based application I develop, I put out a few applications for hosting in return for advertising on. I got a yes on over 50% of my replies -which is way more than I expected!! I definitely didn't expect to have to make a decision between them all. Many hosting companies I know are willing to do this providing they can support the size of the project. Look at php.net as an example for a very large scale project.

Good question.

[FreeLinux]

SourceForge is an obvious consideration for this but, before you put your project there, consider my recent musings [slashdot.org] about SourceForge and VA Software.

You don't outgrow SourceForge.

[jgardn]

You don't outgrow SourceForge. Look at some of the projects hosted there - ViM, Python, several Kernel patches, and much more. Some of the projects there are open-source behemoths, with millions of users.

SourceForge wants to host the big projects. They want millions of people to view the advertisement banners, and they want to get plugged by the best projects out there. You can imagine what they could do to boost sales if they could say, "You know that ultra-popular huge open source project X? We host it. We can host your software as well."

And if you are worried about bandwidth -- that's not even a concern. With mirrors being added a couple a year, bandwidth isn't a concern, and it never will be.

Re:You don't outgrow SourceForge.

[an_mo]

Perhaps, but I find that most of the features in SF are a real pain in the ass. Most imporantly, the bug tracking system. Why can't they use bugzilla? File upload is also quite antiquated. I seriously question that a big project should use sf.

Re:You don't outgrow SourceForge.

[babbage]

Maybe because Bugzilla is also a real pain in the ass?

Now Request Tracker [bestpractical.com] -- that is a high quality bug - slash - general-purpose issue tracker. Bugzilla is great if you happen to be Mozilla, but if your needs are at all different from those of the Mozilla project (hint: everyone's project needs are more or less unique, at least to an extent) then customizing Bugzilla is a pain in the ass. RT on the other hand is extremely flexible, adapts well to people's normal work flows, and scales very well. Check it o

Yes, Virginia, you can outgrow sourceforge.

[Phronesis]

Sourceforge has some serious problems with respect to managing CVS archives. Most important is the dangling lock problem. If a transaction aborts and leaves a dangling lock file, nobody, not even the project admin, can even get read access to cvs until someone emails a sourceforge admin and gets them to go delete the lock file.

This kind of thing might be fine for small projects, but I don't think it's acceptable for a large project.

Also, when I take off my developer hat and put on my consumer hat, when

Re:Yes, Virginia, you can outgrow sourceforge.

[Khalid]

Sourceforge search capabilities really suck big time, for instance you can't search all the forums of the same project in the same time, you need to visit each forum and then do your search. This is really rediculous. It seems that the commercial version of SF has this functionality, but I think they won't install it in SF.net any time soon as they dedicate nearly all the ressource to the commercial version, they only do comstic changes to SF.net once in a while.

Re:You don't outgrow SourceForge.

[Lao-Tzu]

You don't outgrow SourceForge. Look at some of the projects hosted there - ViM, Python, several Kernel patches, and much more. Some of the projects there are open-source behemoths, with millions of users.

Yeah, but at least one of those projects is looking for other hosting. There has been discussion on the python-dev [python.org] mailing list lately about moving away from SourceForge [python.org].

Personally, I think that SourceForge is a great tool for small developing projects. It is pretty versatile and works pretty well

When an open-source project is popular...

[jgardn]

Another issue that you don't have to worry about is what to do when your project becomes popular.

When you have many users, they will help you with the code, with testing, and with documentation. All you have to do is organize them.

When you have many users, finding hosts and mirrors will not be a problem. Someone among them will be willing to put up a mirror, or host it all outright. All you have to do is ask.

When you have many users, even raising funds to finance bandwidth isn't too big of a concern. Ask for grants from companies that use your software. Ask for donations from the members. I'm sure that rather than give you money, they will be more willing to give you bandwidth, but in those cases where money is necessary, you will be able to get it. Remember the Blender project.

This is why the open source model kicks butt versus the closed source model -- open source projects are truly scaleable in all senses of the word.

johncompanies

[egrinake]

I have a open source project myself, which I used to host on sourceforge. However, after having used Sourceforge for six months or so, I decided to go looking for hosting somewhere else. The main reason for doing this was because I always thought the Sourceforge systems are a bit "clunky" and inflexible, and I wanted total freedom in which services to provide, and how to configure them.

After a while I stumbled upon a company called John Companies [johncompanies.com]. These guys provide virtual FreeBSD / Linux servers; you get root on your own system, a unique IP address, and full freedom in what to do with your system.

Now, these guys are professionals - you just know that from day one. The systems are really well run, I have had almost no problems at all (except one network outage because of a couple of busted routers at their network providers). And the support is fantastic - you can ask them about any problem you may have, and they'll usually get back to you at once. Their prices are low too, $65 a month for a freebsd system, but if you are an open source developer they'll even give you a $20 discount.

The only snag, really, is that you'll have to set everything up yourself. This was my main reason for switching from sourceforge anyway, so it wasn't a problem for me - but others may not want to go through all the work.

Disclaimer: I'm not affiliated with John Companies in any way, except being a very, very satisfied customer.

Re:johncompanies

[JimDabell]

Ditto to the JohnCompanies recommendation. They are clueful in the extreme. If you can be your own sysadmin, go for it.

Re:johncompanies

[jmason]

But what about bandwidth limits? John Companies seems to have a limit of 40Gb a month, whereas SF.net has no limit, at least none they list in their documentation.

CCCP

[Wesley Felter]

Some large projects that are too complex to host on SourceForce move to California Community Colo Project [communitycolo.net]. The MusicBrainz [musicbrainz.org] project actually raised enough money for two servers [musicbrainz.org].

Comparison of Free/Open Source Hosting Sites

[kamzik]

Check out this page which contains the list and comparison of existing hosting sites:

http://www.ibiblio.org/fosphost/exhost.htm [ibiblio.org]

(Originally pointed out on Google Answers' question Opensource infrastructure projects [google.com]

Anyone knows about any other hosting sites or SW?

California Community Colocation Project

[davidu]

You host at the California Community Colocation Project [communitycolo.net]

We host quite a few open source projects which require their own dedicated hardware/resources/etc. (groups include penguinppc, musicbrainz, kaffe, and many others)

-davidu