I am saddened that you take the time to say only negative things. You are of course entitled to your opinion, but many people will come to this page to evaluate if they want to use TikiWiki. Your comments can IMHO, turn away some potential users that would have been very happy with TikiWiki.
TikiWiki is the collective work of hundreds of people over 5 years, and used for tens of thousands of sites. I have a very different outlook than you and will comment the words you used.
"Dead" -> TikiWiki is far from dead. In fact, it's thriving. There is a code commit via CVS every two hours on average.
"Bloated" -> TikiWiki is full-featured. It has most features built-in whereas other on CMS systems, you have to download & install third party add-ons, which may or not be supported.
"not modular" -> Tiki has a tight integration of all its features. That's one of the reasons it's so powerful.
There are various schools of thought about modularity. It is not a magic bullet.
"In later discussions Torvalds explained the reasons for its choice: a fully modular architecture, like the one adopted for HURD, would have posed problems to a degree of complexity that it could have compromised the accomplishment of the project. To avoid such risks and keep the degree of complexity of the project as low as possible, Torvalds decided to design a monolith and he actually wrote all the architectural specs himself, avoiding all the problems related to collective projects (e.g. division of labor, coordination, communication). On the other hand, the HURD micro–kernel, a project in direct competition with the Linux kernel, has paid for the choice of pursuing a fully modular approach from the beginning in terms of the continuous delays that have plagued its development. Nowadays, it is still under active development and still lacks the stability and performance assured by the Linux kernel."
Modular Design and the Development of Complex Artifacts: Lessons from Free/Open Source Software by A. Narduzzo & A. Rossi
I would have preferred to read a more balanced judgment. Ex.: TikiWiki can be useful for this type of project or this type of user, but for this other type of user or project, it's better to use Bitweaver.
Of course, TikiWiki is not perfect. Like many tools, it's very useful for some people and not so useful for others.
A response to common questions / concerns about TikiWiki CMS/Groupware
All Free / Libre / Open Source PDF generation solutions were analyzed and mPDF was selected as the overall best solution for deep integration in Tiki. The main reasons are:
1- Vast feature set: The mpdfmanual.pdf is over 600 pages!
2- It’s written in PHP (like Tiki) so it eases deployment, facilitates integration and makes it easier for the Tiki community to contribute.
3- The approach is to convert HTML to PDF (other approaches would have been more complex / less suitable for the Tiki context)
4- Strong multi-lingual support: Some of the other good solutions didn’t support all languages. And thus, it would have forced us to have a second solution for these languages, which would have fragmented the efforts.
Congrats to Cypht being the first client on this list:
And congrats to Jason Munro for his years of perseverance in building Cypht!
Search for "PDFCreator Toolbar" in your favorite search engine, and you'll see the controversy.
FYI, LibreOffice offers a one-click export as PDF feature (Not PDF output as a virtual printer like PDFCreator but does what I need)