MediaWiki-l July 2010

mediawiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org

87 participants
91 discussions

Mysql ISAM vs InnoDB
by Jim Hu 05 Dec '11

05 Dec '11

$wgDBtransactions gets set to true if using InnoDB tables. Is there an advantage to using InnoDB tables? The disadvantage is that with MySQL there is a file, ibdata1, that seems to grow endlessly if InnoDB tables are used. See http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=1341 We're wondering if we should just convert everything to MyISAM. Any thoughts? ===================================== Jim Hu Associate Professor Dept. of Biochemistry and Biophysics 2128 TAMU Texas A&M Univ. College Station, TX 77843-2128 979-862-4054

4 4

Custom namespaces and discussion pages
by Snowolf 24 Jan '11

24 Jan '11

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, I've created some custom namespaced on one of my wikis, Botwiki (previously known as pywikipedia). I've put these lines in my LocalSettings.php file: - --- #Custom namespaces $wgExtraNamespaces = array(100 => "Manual", 101 => "Manual talk", 102 => "Python", 103 => "Python talk", 104 => "Php", 105 => "Php talk", 106 => "Perl", 107 => "Perl talk", 108 => "AWB", 109 => "AWB talk", 110 => "IRC", 111 => "IRC talk", 112 => "Other", 113 => "Other talk" ); $wgContentNamespaces[] = 100; $wgContentNamespaces[] = 102; $wgContentNamespaces[] = 104; $wgContentNamespaces[] = 106; $wgContentNamespaces[] = 108; $wgContentNamespaces[] = 110; $wgContentNamespaces[] = 112; - --- However, I have a big problem: when I go to a page in one of these new namespaces (not the discussion, the main ones), for example http://botwiki.sno.cc/wiki/Perl:Copyright_Violation_Bot , I found the red link to the discussion page. It's right, as there is no discussion page for that article. But if you click on it, it brings you to http://botwiki.sno.cc/w/index.php?title=Perl_talk:Copyright_Violation_Bot&a… correct, of course. But have a look of the article and discussion tabs: they are both red! The first, "article", leads to http://botwiki.sno.cc/w/index.php?title=Perl_talk:Copyright_Violation_Bot&a… when it should lead to http://botwiki.sno.cc/wiki/Perl:Copyright_Violation_Bot and the second, "discussion", leads to http://botwiki.sno.cc/w/index.php?title=Talk:Perl_talk:Copyright_Violation_… , when it should lead to http://botwiki.sno.cc/w/index.php?title=Perl_talk:Copyright_Violation_Bot&a… . It's the first time I deal with custom namespaces :-( but I have some ideas of what it can be. Can the problem be with the $wgContentNamespaces settings? So it detects everything as ns0? (don't think so). Or can it be the fact that I haven't used an underscore in the $wgExtraNamespaces definition? Snowolf -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGWhk7sdafW5NQMtERAuX+AKDQ7QLNjXv9cu+ZbSLXidMzgi/vNgCaA7VT +VTgR3iI/BI7FVDqcyRZVJ0= =a4yP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 2

Does Lucene-Search Support Japanese?
by Ross Xu 01 Oct '10

01 Oct '10

Hi there, I am using Lucene-Search 2.1/MWSearch for my MediaWiki 1.15.1. It's working fine, but it can't search any Japanese characters. I have tried (language,ja) in the lsearch-global.conf file, but it doesn't seem to make any difference. Any idea would be appreciated, Ross __________________________________________________________________ Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of Flickr! http://www.flickr.com/gift/

3 15

External editing broken in MW 1.15.4 ?
by Daniel K. Schneider 11 Sep '10

11 Sep '10

Hi, until I made an upgrade from 1.15.1 (applied the 15.2,3 and 4 patches) I was happily editing my wiki pages with gnu emacs via ee.pl and a bookmarklet that goes: javascript:location=location+'?action=edit&externaledit=true'; (http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:External_editors) Now, external editing is broken I and I suspect that this is related to (bug 23076) Fixed login CSRF vulnerability. Logins now require a token to be submitted along with the user name and password. Patch by Roan Kattouw. Any ideas on what I could/should do to get TRUE external editing back ? I don't mind installing stuff. I am not much of a programmer/sysadmin, but I can read :) I don't want to use something like "It's all text" since it's not practical to edit several wiki pages at the same time and having to keep several browser tabs open just for saving. (I do this at home on a windows box and it's a pain). - thanx for any help / insight ! - Daniel PS: Of course I am not sure about the cause, but in my case identification of the problem (upgrading) is really simple. I got two wikis on the same machine: The 1.15.4 one (http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/) is broken and the 1.15.1 one (http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/fr/) works just fine.

3 4

deploy wiki tree?
by Quiring, Sam 06 Aug '10

06 Aug '10

Greetings, I'm new to this list. We keep the user and internal documentation for our software product in Mediawiki. It works very well, thanks. What we would like to do is take a snapshot of the user doc tree rooted at a specific Mediawiki page. We would like the snapshot to be a complete self-contained set of HTML pages we could ship with the product -- possibly with a Mediawiki reading tool if necessary. The user could point his browser at the snapshot and get the same pages we see. I realize that there could be many difficulties creating such a snapshot, but I'm hoping the tool would have constraining options (e.g., specify a list of URL prefixes - only pages that have one of these prefixes are included in the snapshot, others are listed/noted as warnings by the tool). Is there an existing tool or script that does this? Thanks. -Sam

6 14

making an article link to wikipedia.org
by Phil Howard 06 Aug '10

06 Aug '10

I'm wanting to make an article link, much like Wikipedia makes to its own articles, but instead of using [[whatever]] like would be done to an article on the same site, I want to make it be a link over to the real en.wikipedia.org site, for the article there. The <nowiki> tags with HTML to do it just escape the HTML out to be displayed (e.g. its nowiki and nohtml combined). Example. I have the term Postfix in a local wiki page. If I wrote a page about Postfix on my local wiki, I could just use [[Postfix]] and be done. But I don't want to have to load all the templates from Wikipedia, or maintain that article here. I just want to link over to Wikipedia and let people read it there. -- sHiFt HaPpEnS!

8 17

How to "activate" a new extension
by Alok Watve 03 Aug '10

03 Aug '10

Hi I am a total n00b to mediaWiki. I am writing a new extension to dynamically generate an SVG file. I have written the extension and copied the files in the right places. But mediaWiki does not seem to pick up my extension. DO I need to restart the apache server or something like that in order to make sure my change in LocalSettings.php is picked up. What I don't understand (and I do not think is documented very well ) is how does mediawiki know that the file LocalSettings.php has changed and needs to be re-loaded. Alok

3 4

Exporting templates from Wikipedia
by Sandy Rozhon 03 Aug '10

03 Aug '10

I have attempted to export the Infobox template from Wikipedia by going to the Special:Export page, typing in Template:Infobox in the box labeled "Add from this category", and ticking all three boxes at the bottom (ie. Include only the current revision, not the full history; Include templates; Save as file The problem is that I am not being prompted to save the XML file. Am I doing something wrong? I tried using IE8 and Firefox in case it was a browser issue, but the results are the same. How do I get this export to work? Thanks, Sandy

2 5

MediaWiki version statistics
by Tim Starling 03 Aug '10

03 Aug '10

Cross-posted to <http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2010/07/mediawiki-version-statistics/> Some kind people at Qualys have surveyed versions of open source web apps present on the web, including MediaWiki. Here is the relevant page from their presentation: http://wimg.co.uk/3jK.png For the original see: https://community.qualys.com/docs/DOC-1401 And the press release: <http://www.qualys.com/company/newsroom/newsreleases/usa/view/2010-07-28/> They make the point that 95% of MediaWiki installations have a "serious vulnerability", whereas only 4% of WordPress installations do. While WordPress's web-based upgrade utility certainly has a positive impact on security, I feel I should point out that what WordPress counts as a serious vulnerability does not align with MediaWiki's definition of the same term. For instance, if a web-based user could execute arbitrary PHP code on the server, compromising all data and user accounts, we would count that as the most serious sort of vulnerability, and we would do an immediate release to fix it. We're proud of the fact that we haven't had any such vulnerability in a stable release since 1.5.3 (December 2005). However in WordPress, they count this as a feature, and all administrators can do it. Similarly, WordPress avoids the difficult problem of sanitising HTML and CSS while preserving a rich feature set by simply allowing all authors to post raw HTML. If you are running MediaWiki in a CMS-like mode, with whitelist edit and account creation restricted, then I think it's fair to say that in terms of security, you're better off with MediaWiki 1.14.1 or later than you are with the latest version of WordPress. However, the statistics presented by Qualys show that an alarming number of people are running versions of MediaWiki older than 1.14.1, which was the most recent fix for an XSS vulnerability exploitable without special privileges. There is certainly room for us to do better. We have a new installer project in development, which we hope to release in 1.17. It includes a feature which encourages users to sign up for our release announcements mailing list. But maybe we need to do more. Should we take a leaf from WordPress's book, and nag administrators with a prominent notice when they are not using the latest version? Such a feature would require MediaWiki to "dial home", which is controversial in our developer community. -- Tim Starling

12 17

Protect tab not working the way I expected
by Michael Kingery (HL7) 02 Aug '10

02 Aug '10

Here's the basic information about my install: MediaWiki 1.12.0 PHP 5 Database MySQL What I'm looking to do is to allow any user with edit permissions to be able to Protect a page so that only Sysops are able to edit / unprotect it. To do this I turned on the Protect tab with the following code in the LocalSettings.php file: # Only allow users and sysops to protect a page $wgGroupPermissions['*']['protect'] = false; $wgGroupPermissions['user']['protect'] = true; $wgGroupPermissions['sysop']['protect'] = true; The Protect tab does show up now, and you can protect a page, but when ANYONE with edit privileges goes to edit they are able to do so regardless of unprotecting the page or being a sysop. When editing, it does show the following message, but lets you edit and save anyways: WARNING: This page has been locked so that only users with sysop privileges can edit it. Any thoughts?

5 10

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

MediaWiki-l July 2010