On Wednesday, August 20, 2014, Isarra Yos <zhorishna(a)gmail.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','zhorishna@gmail.com');>> wrote:
When someone creates a product specifically for a certain group of users
(in this case folks installing extensions) without actually knowing what is
useful to them (never even mind 'important' at this stage), there is
something seriously wrong with that process.
This proposal was part of a research project done by Maria Miteva which
involved a survey to a diverse collection of third party MediaWiki users.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Third-party_MediaWiki_users_discussion/Summa…
On the other hand, user ratings are a widespread feature. They are not THE
solution for the current mess we have in the
mediawiki.org Extensions
namespace (call it a catalog would be too ambitious), but it looks like a
reasonable candidate for the mix.
Wikiapiary.com is part of the MediaWiki community and they have happily
mentored, supported, and deployed this feature. Only for this, Aditya's
GSoC can be considered a success.
In order to move forward, we can discuss at different levels:
* At a general level, which should be the priorities for mediawiki.org's
gallery of extensions? This will allow us to define more tasks and projects
for potential developers.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/ExtensionGallery
* At the level of Aditya's project, do we want to try the integration of
user ratings for extensions in mediawiki.org? Which requirements should the
ratings shown meet? For the next step, should we focus on integrating
Wikiapiary's data or should we come up with a solution for MW.O users to
ate directly there?
--
Quim Gil
Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil