What do you guys think would be more useful:
1. Helping sister projects write up proposals for the Berlin Hackathon
2. Creating "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Writing MediaWiki Extensions"
and "The Complete Idiot's Guide to Writing MediaWiki Gadgets (in jQuery)"
Whichever one you guys prefer, I'll pitch to my Engineering Project
Managers as a project for myself.
Ryan Kaldari
On 4/2/11 12:29 PM, bawolff wrote:
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:40:00 -0700
From: Ryan Kaldari<rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Focus on sister projects
To: Conrad Irwin<conrad.irwin(a)gmail.com>
Cc: Wikimedia developers<wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Message-ID:<4D967E70.2080108@wikimedia.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
[...]
As long as we're on the subject of
wiktionary, I notice that there's a
lot of custom Javascript there for handling specialized editing tasks
like editing glosses, managing translations, etc. It seems like some of
this functionality could be improved further and developed into
full-fledged extensions (making it easy for other wiktionaries to use as
well). Would you have any interest in working up a couple Wiktionary
project proposals for the upcoming Hackathon in Berlin?
Ryan Kaldari
This isn't just true of wiktionary. Lots of sister projects have
specialized work flow tools
in js. Wikinews has review related tools in js and a hack that adds a
second "talk" namespace,
Wikisource has the proofread page extension, but still much of there
workflow is written in js,
I'm sure many other projects have specialized stuff that should be in
php extensions.
The issue is at the end of the day it is _significantly_ easier to
write a js hack, then
to manage to get a php extension written, reviewed and deployed.
-bawolff
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l