Hey,
I'm wondering if we still need to support PHP 5.3.
http://blog.ircmaxell.com/2014/12/on-php-version-requirements.html
I'd rather bump the minimum version up to PHP 5.5, and know people have
been talking about doing the same for MediaWiki itself. My question is if
this can already be done without making Wikibase undeployable on WMF
servers. Is everything running HHVM yet, or is there some stuff relevant to
Wikibase that still runs an unsupported version of PHP?
Cheers
--
Jeroen De Dauw - http://www.bn2vs.com
Software craftsmanship advocate
Evil software architect at Wikimedia Germany
~=[,,_,,]:3
On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 9:22 AM, Jon Robson <jrobson(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Great stuff. cc Wikidata, I know they were interested in replacing
> their custom template engine...
> I will respond to Krinkle's review for the client side library today.
> Jon
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 12:07 PM, Ryan Kaldari <rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
>> After 14 months of discussion, HTML templating is now live in core
>> MediaWiki. Currently only the server-side implementation has been merged. A
>> client-side implementation has also been submitted, but is stalled in
>> Gerrit (https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/180647/).
>>
>> You can now use Mustache templates in your extensions and core code by
>> calling TemplateParser->processTemplate(). Full documentation can be found
>> at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:HTML_templates.
>>
>> There are three main impetuses for this new feature:
>>
>> 1. Improving the sanity and readability of MediaWiki code. Ideally, our PHP
>> code should have little or no HTML in it. We should strive to keep our PHP
>> interfaces high-level and with clear separation of concerns. We are a long
>> way from conforming to anything like an MVC pattern, but this brings us one
>> step closer to being able to achieve that. The work on OOjs and related
>> interfaces is another important component of this.
>>
>> 2. Standardizing our templating implementations. There are currently six
>> different HTML templating implementations in various MediaWiki
>> extensions.[1] Hopefully, we can now reduce that number.
>>
>> 3. Moving MobileFrontend into core. We are also a long way away from
>> achieving this goal, but now one step closer. MobileFrontend relies heavily
>> on HTML templating, so having this feature in core is a pre-requisite to
>> moving more MobileFrontend features over.
>>
>> I know there is still disagreement about the specific implementation
>> details of this feature (such as the choice of Mustache), but this is just
>> the first iteration of this feature and I hope we can work together to
>> revise and improve it further.
>>
>> 1.
>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/HTML_templating_library…
>>
>> Ryan Kaldari
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>> Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
tl/dr: The technology we started building against (Titan) is probably
dead. We're reopening the investigation for a backing technology.
Yesterday DataStax <http://www.datastax.com/> announced
<http://www.datastax.com/2015/02/datastax-acquires-aurelius-the-experts-behi…>
that they'd acquired
<http://www.datastax.com/2015/02/datastax-acquires-aurelius-the-experts-behi…>
ThinkAurelius <http://thinkaurelius.com/>, the company for whom almost all
the Titan developers work. The ZDNet article
<http://www.zdnet.com/article/datastax-snaps-up-aurelius-and-its-titan-team-…>
made it pretty clear that they are killing the project
> "We're not going to do an integration. The play here is we'll take
> everything that's been done on Titan as inspiration, and maybe some of the
> Titan project will make it into DSE Graph," DataStax engineering VP Martin
> Van Ryswyk said.
While its certainly possible that someone from the community will come out
of the woodwork and continue Titan its now lost almost all of its top
developers. It looks like there is some secret succession discussions
going on but I'm not holding out hope that anything will come of it. This
pretty much blows this project's schedule of having a hardware request by
the end of the month and a publicly released beta at the end of March.
Anyway, we're reopening the investigation to pick a new backend. We're
including more options than we had before as its become clear that open
source graph databases is a bit of a wild west space. But there are people
waiting on this. The developer summit made that clear. So we're not going
to do the month long dive into each choice like we did last time. I'm not
100% sure exactly what we'll do but I can assure you we'll be careful.
I know you might want to talk about other options - you may as well stuff
them on
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikibase/Indexing#Other_possible_candidates
and we'll get to them. As always, you can check out our workboard
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/board/37/query/DwEBx9K4vaHo/> to
see what we're actually working on.
Titan is still in the running assuming it gets active maintainers.
OrientDB, which we evaluated last round, is still in there too. So too are
GraphX and Neo4j. And ArangoDB. And Magnus' WDQ. We'd get much more
involved in maintenance, I think. And writing a TinkerPop implementation
Elasticsearch. That's not a serious contender. It'd get geo support for
free but its really just a low bar to compare all the other options to.
Thanks,
Nik <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88550>