interesting.. their backend is tigris..basically a version control system

this is going to be a GREAT tool for developers – SVN is the best version control out there. It would be nice to search code though – like krugle

Unlike SourceForge, you don't need to get your project formally approved. Fill in a form and it starts working!

Google Code Hosting has a very restricted range of permitted open source licenses (although they hint that the list might be extended in the future): Apache, Artistic, GPL, LGPL, MIT, MPL, BSD. No Creative Commons, for example.

Biggest downside for me? You need to log in using your GMail account. I use a non-GMail account for all my other Google services.

But I will probably use this service. Google's search works better than anything SourceForge offers, and they promise that it will be fast (which SourceForge rarely is).

They should have the GNU GPL CC license:
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/GPL/2.0/

this is a pwoerful platform ..has anyone checked out this linky ?

http://code.google.com/p/hostingdemo

yes roger articulates a good cause.. if its so open source, then why there a need for google account/id ?? or are we jumping to conclusions to fast ??

Well I was partially right. Awesome.

well you have to have a sourceforge acct to upload code to sourceforge too. What did you think they were going to do, let just anybody upload code with no account? And the reason it's a gmail account is so they don't have to worry about youdomain1.com and youdomain2.com – they just accept yougmail.com then can have the url code.google.com/u/you

Caleb E:

Forbidden
Your client does not have permission to get URL /p/hostingdemo/ from this server.

http://news.com.com/Google+launches+open-source+repository/2100-7344_3-6099515.html

I put together a list of all the current features of Google Code – Project Hosting at:
https://engtech.wordpress.com/2006/07/28/google-code-project-hosting-a-replacement-for-sourceforge/

==="Once a project is created, the administrator can change the initial settings, add urls for links, discussion groups, and blogs as well as setting up an email notification for Subversion activity. The discussion group has to be a Google Groups."

Wonder why this was not intergrated directly.... create project.. use name ..autocreate group.. why dud this have to be manual ?

engtech : I see that you also mention in your post...

" Why are you releasing code through Sourceforge?
Well, because they were nice enough to oblige, and because developers here like Sourceforge. Future homes for new projects might include Tigris.org or language specific sites like the Vaults of Parnassus and CPAN. "

Yes, I clued into tigris.org at the beginning of this thread and was just wondering what your thought are and why you highligthed this connection with tigris ??

A couple more details from http://weblogs.mozillazine.org/gerv/archives/2006/07/googforge.html who was at the launch:

"a Subversion repository, backed by their Bigtable storage engine (rather than BDB or FSFS) plus a new, simplified bug tracker which uses good search and tagging as a substitute for having lots of fields"

I should have looked a bit further – the best article on this seems to be the interview with Greg Stein and Chris DiBona at http://www.newsforge.com/article.pl?sid=06/07/27/1833251

I'm a bit sceptic... I'm a big fan of Sourceforge.net. If it was opensource it could be found nearly always through Sourceforge.net.

Now with the Google initiative changes are really great that you'll have to check always both sites.

Isn't that dividing the open source community rather than enforcing it?

Isn't the sole goal of Google binding the Open Source community rather than the genuine goal of supporting it?

Maybe we will see a semi-integration.
Google will already have indexed the projects available on sourceforge for their primary search tool. So maybe as a show of good will while they are building up their own project base if a search of Google code returns no results (or even limited) they could show matched projects on sourceforge.

Why would google promote a competitor directly on its site? Well if you knew that projects were split between 2 different sites. And one site offered you the chance to search both at once. Which is going to be your primary site when looking for opensource software?

I doubt a new offering is going to do too much to split the open source community. I'ts unlikely a significant number of projects will move away from SourceForge.net – more likely is that new, small open source projects might find the simplicity of Google's approach appealing; Setting up a project takes literally seconds.

Larger projects will want the level of configurability that Google doesn't support.

I imagine the idea here is to lure out smaller projects by making it easier to set up an open source environment. If they offered private projects I'd have mine in there already – not that that's on their agenda, this is about *open* source!

As for checking both sites – give it a round of development, Google search will soon be indexing projects on both sites. Let's face it, if you want to find an open source project the way to do it should be via a search engine rather than having to trawl individual sites.

oh and @pd : My guess is cause google has always been a fan of K.I.S.S (well if their sites are anything to go by) so they probably understand that not every project will require all available options. So rather than force options upon people/projects which dont require them they let those which need them set them up.

At least thats my best guesstimate as to their reasoning.

BTW Google Code is not yet on the Google Account.

Aaron & Reto: You're right a good search engine crawling both (and even more) sites would be the perfect solution for this.

A "*" search (no quotation marks) now gives me 1586 results. "the" (again, no quotes) gives 609 now. It's definately growing. The search was a little bit slower than I expected, though. How good is the search for anyone else?

Mysterius

Subversion is called SVN not CVS.

It seems to be there are some problem with this service. Seems to be working very slow. Anyone has used it yet?