That's a good idea to go in a more web-publishing CMS type direction 
like Drupal.  That's a better fit and can produce a better looking 
website than a wiki.  I think I was wrong about wiki.  Only a few 
specific people will do any website design work and those people can go 
ahead and have a separate login.  In that case, login integration with 
the forum doesn't matter much.  For security, I'd almost rather have a 
different login than be constantly checking the forum with the same 
login that could pwn the website.

Drupal's forum is less bad than the wikis, but still a long way from 
something I would want to use.

zetaboards pros and cons:

pros:
- we don't have to worry about bandwidth
- they handle the backend management and security patches

con:
- lack of SSL
- lack of privacy, everything is logged
- lack of control over the php code for customization
- no CAPTCHA, and if they add one later it might be unacceptable flash
- ads (could pay to get rid of them later if we care enough)
- there's always the risk they abruptly cancel the site for some petty 
reason


mmalmi@cc.hut.fi wrote:
>> What do you see as the benefits of switching the wiki?
>> Some I can think of:
>>  SSL
>>  get away from sourceforge's unreliable hosting
>>  everything not logged by sourceforge
> 
> I think the biggest advantage is having a single site so you don't need 
> a separate account for the wiki and the forum, and the functionalities 
> are also nicely integrated with the main site itself. Also being ad-free 
> is a plus.
> 
>> The forum feature is about as weak as bitweaver.  We need a full blown
>> forum software for that.
> 
> How about Drupal's forum functionality? Address: 
> https://174.143.149.98/drupal/. The CMS in general looks better and 
> simpler than TikiWiki. If the forum's not good enough, then we can of 
> course use a specialized forum software like phpBB.
> 
>> My priority right now is to get a forum going, either phpBB or similar.
>>  What do you think of the zetaboards option?  Should we go ahead with
>> that?
> 
> Otherwise fine, but the ads and the lack of SSL are a minus.
>