That's a great observation, Asaf, SJ.

Indeed, there is space for implementations to live side by side - also because different implementations may make more sense in different circumstances, something I hope will be explored further in the future. That should reduce the stakes significantly, and thus should give us more space to get to a good policy.

Note that this really is not about creating content for Abstract Wikipedia, but solely about Wikifunctions. Any such policy for Abstract Wikipedia would, I guess, require much more scrutiny.

A first draft has been made by Ameisenigel, and already extended, and discussion is starting: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Abstract_Wikipedia/Staff_editing - I am looking forward to see this develop and mature.

Thank you!

Denny

On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 10:25 PM Samuel Klein <meta.sj@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tue, Sep 27, 2022 at 9:32 PM Asaf Bartov <abartov@wikimedia.org> wrote:
I agree this makes sense.

Thus, if X really hates Y's implementation of a factorial function, X can write their own (or fork!), and both can live side by side, and re-users will get to choose which implementation they prefer. That alone can significantly pre-empt a lot of potential conflict.

Good point, this could be a low-stakes shift. Anyone who wants a new version of a function should have a persistent instance of that fork to point to, with a name + version history that distinguish it from others in the same family tree.

SJ

_______________________________________________
Abstract-Wikipedia mailing list -- abstract-wikipedia@lists.wikimedia.org
List information: https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/abstract-wikipedia.lists.wikimedia.org/