Hi everyone,
Per bug 64881[1], I have copied all of compat's wikitionary/ folder
into a separate repository named pywikibot/wiktionary. I also did some
minor pep8-ification[2]. The tests were failing though[3], and I don't
understand the code enough to fix them.
However, now compat also has a copy of the code. Should we just turn
wiktionary/ into a submodule pointing at the separate repository?
Also, AFAIS wiktionary.py is just a copy of all the individual files
combined together. I'm not sure what to do with it.
[1] https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=64881
[2] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/148243/
[3] https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=68348
-- Legoktm
I hereby propose to create a common way for bot classes to 'pipe' the
changed text to other classes without saving it directly to the wiki.
So, botops could do something like:
python pwb.py pipe [generator] scripts/harvest_template [options] +
scripts/weblinkchecker [options] + scripts/replace [options]
to make custom replacements, check external links and enrich Wikidata
with a single edit (except for the Wikidata import process).
Hi,
Having found a few interested pictures with historic monuments on
Panoramio, I've ported panoramiopicker.py for core. In the process, I
did a "few hacks" in order to get a complete description page for my
use-case, so I've ended up with a messy code, quite far from the
original. However, the script is now more permissive with the layout
changes and even recognises cc-by licenses.
My question is: is anyone using or at least planning to use this
script? The effort to clean the code and have it reviewed is
non-trivial and I will only make it if anyone is interested.
Thanks,
Strainu
Many of our scripts have copyright notices at the top like this
(category.py):
# (C) Rob W.W. Hooft, 2004
and then:
# (C) Pywikibot team, 2008-2013
even if most contributors (e.g. Rob W.W. Hooft) are regularly listed in
CREDITS.
Is it to mark the main contributors? I haven't seen that notices being
updated for months, even when some scripts get significantly improved or
rewritten.
Hello all,
This summer I am working on a project to evaluate and improve the
available MediaWiki web API client libraries. As pywikibot met the
initial criteria of quality, features, and development status I chose
to evaluate it in more depth. There is now a "gold standard"[1] that
will be used to find and enable the listing of particularly
well-designed and easy-to-use MediaWiki web API client libraries--I've
now evaluated several Python libraries against this standard and
suggested additions and changes that would help them meet the
standard.
First, thank you all for contributing to pywikibot and its community of users!
My evaluation for pywikibot is posted here.[2] Pywikibot is
impressively full-featured (including Wikidata API coverage), and it
makes it possible for bot runners and wiki maintainers to quickly get
started automating wiki management tasks. Some areas that could be
improved include expanded and centralized documentation, efficiency in
use of API calls, and making the setup process lighter-weight and
easier to use.
I will follow up by posting specific suggestions to Bugzilla[3] later
this week. If you have comments or questions, please feel free to post
on the evaluation talk page, respond to the bugs filed, or make
corrections on the evaluation page if I've missed something.
-Frances Hocutt
MediaWiki intern
[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Client_code/Gold_standard
[2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Client_code/Evaluations/Pywikibot
[3] https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/buglist.cgi?query_format=specific&product=Py…
