Referring to Jeremiah's first comment on the 3 things provided by SourceForge: I would argue that the OpenWetWare wiki itself covers the first 2 pretty well - communication methods and project definitions. What we really need is to fill the 3rd - a revision control system (of which CVS is one.)

There has been some discussion in a recent OWW steering committee meeting about providing 'code hosting' on OWW whereby a user would request a code repository, and it would be hosted on OWW servers (much as is done on SourceForge). The advantages to this are many, but two of them are that:

1.) From a users perspective, OWW can now house all the prose associated with a project (lab notebooks, protocols, paper writing, etc.) as well as the code used to perform data analysis. With both of these sources of information in one place, OWW can start to provide very convienient inter-linking such as the ability to reference the code files used to generate the plots on a particular wiki page (or blog post). It would be also easy for people to look up the wiki pages that were used to write a paper, click on links to access the code in the repositories and run the analysis again with the parameters or inputs of their choice.

2.) OWW now has another piece of the puzzle to being an 'Open Science' project management system, very analogous to SourceForge being an Open Source project management system.

The advantages to having things under one roof (rather than promoting the use of SourceForge) are several as well including:

1.) It will be much easier to integrate things into the current OWW resources (mentioned above).
2.) It will certainly turn out that the needs of scientists are different from the needs of software developers. I think scientists could certainly benefit from learning a few of the practices of modern software development (like version control), but there will be differences. We could tweak the OWW system to be more suited to scientists, while promoting the natural parts of the software development system.
3.) This can eventually be added upon, including a versioning of scientific data sets that could be integrated into OWW services as described above.

If OWW were to offer a reversion control system for code (or anything else you can put into such a system), would people be interested?