Hi,

Sam proposes switching to Cargo. However, from what I've heard (and I
haven't used Cargo myself), Cargo is another beast and comes with its
own problems as well. Someone with more experience with Cargo should
probably assess whether it would be a good idea or not to use Cargo
here. Maybe there's a way to do roughly the same queries by using
categories instead, and the help of one of the available
DynamicPageList extensions.

Best regards,

--
Jesús Martínez
Ciencia Al Poder

El mié, 27 dic 2023 a las 2:29, Sam Wilson (<sam@samwilson.id.au>) escribió:
>
> My understanding is that the basic structure of Wikiapiary is firstly a
> system of templates etc that stores data from the sites' pages into SMW
> and then reads it out for various reports; and secondly the scripts that
> populate the wikitext pages with data fetched from the sites (and
> extensions etc). The really valuable bits to me are the fact of having a
> categorized/tagged index to MediaWiki sites, and the extension
> popularity info. The first part of that is most valuable as a
> human-curated thing, so I think that'd make sense to get back online
> even if it wasn't bot-updated. The extension and other site info is
> silly to update by hand, but there isn't an absolute reason that the
> bots doing the updating need to be part of the WikiApiary
> infrastructure, so perhaps if WikiApiary was online, a new system of
> fetching site info could be built.
>
> Then, of course, is the separate issue of *how* to store the info on the
> wiki. It's SMW at the moment, but it sounds like that hits some resource
> issues given the number of queries being run and the amount of data.
> Would Cargo be better? I feel like switching to that would be not an
> insurmountable thing to do (compared to say moving to Wikibase to store
> the data, which would be a bigger restructure). The individual sites'
> pages mightn't even need to be changed (if all the storage/querying
> logic is in templates and modules).
>
> I vote for bringing it online again now, even if it's without SMW or the
> bots, and updating it to the latest MediaWiki. If any of that's possible
> of course.
>
> Thank you for working on it! I'm not sure how much time I've got to
> help, but I'd love to try.
>
> —Sam
>
>
> On 27/12/23 08:47, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
> > Triple Camera <TripleCamera@outlook.com> writes:
> >
> >> The database has been locked for half a year, Bots and editors are
> >> waiting, and they are losing patience. I believe the most urgent thing
> >> to do is to make WikiApiary back online as soon as possible.
> > If we brought WikiApiary back online right now without the bots, would
> > that be acceptable?
> >
> > I'm trying to understand what you need from the site and how you've used
> > it, so any information you have would be useful.
> >
> > If you or other users of the site can let us know how you would like to
> > use it, that well help us make sure we are able bring it back online in
> > as useful a way as possible.
> >
> > Mark.
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Wikiapiary mailing list -- wikiapiary@lists.wikimedia.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to wikiapiary-leave@lists.wikimedia.org
_______________________________________________
Wikiapiary mailing list -- wikiapiary@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikiapiary-leave@lists.wikimedia.org