Internally, we use dropbox for the storage of asset files (.psd, .ai, etc.) because they aren't allowed to be uploaded to our mediawiki instances.
Historically we put such things in svn [1] so they don't get lost (and many of the older original assets did get lost). Why can't these sorts of things go in git? Having them in some dropbox somewhere seems to be just begging for the original assets to get lost 5 years from now.
[1] https://svn.wikimedia.org/viewvc/mediawiki/trunk/artwork/
--bawolff
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Brandon Harris bharris@wikimedia.org wrote:
For a project like this, I'd prefer it to go onto the wiki (and mediawiki.org is fine; we [developers] control it). For bulk uploads, get a copy of the Commonist and just point it at mw.org Internally, we use dropbox for the storage of asset files (.psd, .ai, etc.) because they aren't allowed to be uploaded to our mediawiki instances.On Jul 3, 2013, at 10:19 AM, bawolff bawolff+wn@gmail.com wrote:
Normally I try to upload screenshots to Commons, but it's kind of a pain in the butt to upload MediaWiki screenshots there because you have use custom licensing templates every time. So if you just want to upload locally to MediaWiki.org like S was doing I think that works. We also considered just opening a Dropbox folder, since this stuff doesn't necessarily need to be permanent.
Please don't just use dropbox. Transparency and all...
I don't understand why mediawiki.org would be easier to upload than commons. Just use https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Upload instead of uploadwizard and put your custom license tag in the permissions field (and have the license drop down set to none).
--bawolff
Design mailing list Design@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate