trevor.hemsley at ntlworld.com
Wed Aug 8 16:39:09 EDT 2012
On 08/08/12 21:10, Akemi Yagi wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 12:40 PM, Karanbir Singh <mail-lists at karan.org> wrote:
>> On 08/08/2012 08:37 PM, Akemi Yagi wrote:
>>> I hate to ignore what has been done in the past and pretend things are
>>> starting new. For example, it was considered, at some point, that
>>> phpBB was a good choice and a good amount of effort to migrate xoops
>>> to phpBB was made. I can list a few threads from the past (year 2008
>>> to 2010):
>> yes, and working on facts that are upto 4 years out of date is'nt ideal
>> either. Its quite possible that software out there has evolved in the
>> mean time.
> That is what I'm afraid to hear. It means the time and effort spent
> back then has gone to the waste land unless there is anything you can
> salvage (not savage).
> Just hope the current thread does not follow all the past examples and
> die down...
Looks to me like the objection to SMF based on its license is now
resolved though so that might put it back into consideration. I've been
reading their doc and it seems quite comprehensive and SMF seems to have
a number of supporters.
I'm unsure how many of the required bullet points it hits though. So
far, I have yet to find any mention of LDAP support though I haven't
explicitly looked for it. Hmmm, now I did and it seems there isn't
anything officially supported but there is something that might work if
hit hard enough.
All the other bullet points look like things I would just expect to find
in an up-to-date forum software. The data migration might be the
stumbling block since I get the impression that xoops/newbb boards are
not exactly widely deployed.
More information about the CentOS-devel