On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 4:27 AM, Denny Vrandečić <denny.vrandecic@wikimedia.de> wrote:
> This was already discussed here:
> <http://www.mail-archive.com/wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org/msg69983.html>Yes, it was discussed. I was traveling the week that thread broke out, and never fully caught up on that particular thread (only fully read it this morning), so my apologies.
That said, it didn't appear to me that we actually resolved anything there. Did I miss something?
> Scribunto and Babel are other extensions that have dependencies, and there
> are more of them. We are not setting a sole precedent here.
I'm not saying that, because we haven't really managed dependencies between internal libraries before that we can't do it now. However, I don't think your examples support your case that this is already standard practice.
I'm trying to understand the breakup of the extensions, and in our continuing discussion, you've pointed me at varying bits of documentation that don't answer the questions that I have.
I'd like to understand what exactly is so terrible about the status quo that you all are blocked on your development. If this refactoring is really so urgent, why can't you clearly and concisely state not only what you are doing, but *why* you are doing it.
Well, we can move forward with this specifically:
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/76481/
I would hope you can hold off on the other refactoring until there is at least one person on my team who can confidently explain what the role of each of the extensions you're proposing is. I was going to bite the bullet and just get my head around it myself, but I need to be realistic about the level of effort I can expend with this.
Rob