Hi,
The Cargo extension looks like a good choice compared to Wikibase.
It would require too much efforts to migrate from Semantic MediaWiki to Wikibase, but migrating to Cargo should be much easier with the same structure.
Using one of the DynamicPageList extensions might be one of the options, but after looking in to the current template "Template:Website", some fields/parameters didn't fit it well (e.g., {{#set:Has image URL= ).
Another option could be using both Cargo and one of the DynamicPageList extensions with categories at the same time.
Best regards, Winston Sung
On 2023-12-27 10:04 (UTC), Sam Wilson sam@samwilson.id.au wrote:
I'm not really sure if Cargo is the right option, but it's the simplest alternative I know of to SMW.
Perhaps categories would suffice, if the important stats can be expressed just as category counts. It sounds like it could get annoying though.
I do feel a bit like we'd be missing a win if, for the query-able data in a site about MediaWikis, we were forced to build a custom extension for doing the querying. It's the sort of thing that lots of wikis want to do! But maybe it's the best way to go.
On 2023-12-27 09:16 (UTC), Jesús Martínez martineznovo@gmail.com wrote:
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
On 2023-12-27 01:29 (UTC), Sam Wilson sam@samwilson.id.au wrote:
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 2023-12-27 00:47 (UTC), Mark A. Hershberger mah@nichework.com wrote:
Triple Camera TripleCamera@outlook.com wrote:
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.
On 2023-12-25 09:55 (UTC), Triple Camera TripleCamera@outlook.com wrote:
Hi Mark,
Sorry, but I don't think rebuilding from scratch is a good idea. Rewriting the infrastructure that has been running for 10 years is a lot of work. If you don't have time to resolve problems now, you won't have time to redesign the site either.
Three months ago, you proposed to downgrade WikiApiary to a lower SMW version. This option seems more feasible. 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. So, I suggest that we can downgrade and reopen this site first, and then gradually replace the old infrastructure.
Also, could you share more information about which parts need to be rewritten?
Thanks.
Regards,
TripleCamera2022
On 2023-12-23 00:51 (UTC), Mark A. Hershberger mah@nichework.com wrote:
Dear fans of WikiApiary,
After a year or more of limping along, we're taking WikiApiary offline to rebuild the site.
If you use Wikiapiary or have used Wikiapiary, or have written a bot that uses Wikiapiary, we need your input on the design.
We need the help of volunteers. We have ideas around how to construct the site so that it is robust, but we'd like input from the community for its design.
The reimplementation of Wikiapiary is mainly happening because we couldn't resolve some SMW issues and its query limitations as well as just the need to update the wiki.
The site has become unmaintainable and those of us who have been responsible for the back-end (mainly Cindy and myself) haven't had time to dedicate to resolving the problems
A major contributing factor to this decision is the ongoing cost of hosting. Previously, we started to move it back to Wikimedia Cloud Services, but attempted to upgrade it before moving it while keeping the design the same.
That ended up causing problems which blocked our progress.
As a result, we've decided we need to rethink Wikiapiary's design completely and rebuild it from scratch.
I'm interested in your feedback and any ideas you may have.
Thanks,
Mark.
_______________________________________________
Wikiapiary mailing list -- wikiapiary@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to wikiapiary-leave@lists.wikimedia.org