I'll add on * Creating next round - sorry for latency. This is already implemented. On July 16 as Alexander mentioned himself * Tool unavailability ** I installed monit service to reload jury tool and mysql when it goes down. Will have to wait and see if this helps. Before this I tried upstart and systemd configurations that also have respawn option. Unfortunately they worked on Ubuntu/Debian/Centos 7, but not on Centos 6 that is on WMUA's server, so I have to look for other tool and used monit for this. ** Tool is already deployed on Tool Labs - https://tools.wmflabs.org/wlxjury/auth * [T141908 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T141908] Restriction that users have contest assigned to them and cannot be added to another - will be fixed by end of the week. * [T141909 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T141909] Complete export from the jury tool. It is actually available in the form of exporting each juror rating or selection separately and overall rating for rating rounds. What is suggested is to have overall number of jurors that selected an image in the selection round and (Leila's suggestion) one cross table with images as rows, jurors as columns and rating/selections as cell. This is a trivial change as everything is already loaded in statistics module, I'll just to have to output these specific fields. Also will be done by end of the week.
Regarding alternate tool. Overall I think it's always good to have alternative and understand what we have. I know at least two tools which can to be good -
- Israel jury tool by User:Ynhockey https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ynhockey (his own claim) - Germany jury tool - http://tools.wmflabs.org/jury/ (Germany has lots of images and usually select winners fast, so I hope their tool is good)
Unfortunately I have not seen them, and their sources are not published.
Regarding developing of some completely new tool. I don't think it is a serious option. It will be very effort consuming and most certainly will not provide a better tool than already existing ones. At least for this years WLM.
Regards, Ilya
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Lily lilyofthewest.wikimedia@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Alexander and others, :)
*What I did in the past 2+ days* I reviewed your comments carefully and talked with a subset of the WLM international team including Ilya about the issues you have raised. I also reached out to few people outside of the team, to hear their thoughts and experiences, and here I am proposing the next steps.
*Next steps*
- Ilya will be looking to onboard one person to work with him on the
code-base. This person will also create the redundancy that you mentioned in your notes earlier. Ideally, between Ilya and this person, the response time will be "same-day" except for non-critical requests. (If you know Scala or you know Java and you are passionate to get to the Scala world, please contact Ilya, and cc me.)
- Ilya will give it a try to move the code-base to Tools this week. This
will make sure that the service will have a standard up-time we can count on. There are three tasks associated with this effort: T141910, T124902, T141908. You can find them at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/2005/. Ilya and I will review the tasks at the end of this week and re-assess the time they require.
- Given the time crunch, Ilya and I discussed pursuing a plan B or an
alternative tool that the international team can work on while Ilya is busy fixing bugs and improving WLX in the coming weeks. Based on this conversation, I have started reaching out to the owners of the 5 other jury tools. In the coming days, my attention will be focused on assessing where these tools are at the moment, and figuring out if offering one of them as an alternative makes sense. We also discussed the option of developing another tool. Basically, all options are on the table with plan b at the moment.
- I will do my best to send updates to wikilovesmonuments public list
about the progress with regards to the jury tool. If you don't hear from me and you want to hear more, please ask on the list, and I will get back to you there. :)
*Help needed* We have a short time before the start of the contest, and I want us to feel confident that we will have a solid tool for everyone when we start on Sep. 1. We cannot do this alone though:
- If we are to adapt any of the current tools or create a new tool, we are
under a time crunch. If you can help with usability testing of the tool we will work on under time constraints, please let me know off-list.
- We also may need help for further developing one of the current tools,
or creating a new one. If you have time to help with that under the current time constraints, please email me off-list with information about the languages you are comfortable with and maybe a GitHub repository of (a sample of) your past work.
And last but not least, I want to assure you that coming up with a solution for the jury tool(s) that we can use more smoothly during this year's WLM contest has a high priority for the international team. You have our commitments here. :)
Best, Leila, on behalf of the WLM international team
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 7:22 AM, Lily lilyofthewest.wikimedia@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Alexander,
Thank you for sharing your experience. We will review your comments in the WLM international team and will get back to you by 2016-08-03. In terms of the timelines, there is a general understanding in the team that we'd like to have a fully functional jury tool before WLM kicks off on Sep. 1. Otherwise, we will have many sleepless nights and create many more of those for others. It's our high priority to avoid that. :)
Best, Leila, on behalf of WLM international team
On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Alexander Tsirlin altsirlin@gmail.com wrote:
We had very bad experience with using the WLX jury tool this year. I described it at length here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:WLX_Jury_Tool
Several possible solutions are also mentioned on that page. I would like to hear your opinion about this situation. Could anyone help Ilya with developing and maintaining the jury tool, and make sure that it works at it should work?
If we are planning to meet a very sharp deadline of October 25 for WLM photos, the jury tool should work absolutely smoothly, and user support has to be very prompt. Or it would be good to know already now that we can't rely on the jury tool, and alternative solutions should be searched for.
Sincerely, Alexander
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
-- User: LilyOfTheWest
-- User: LilyOfTheWest
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Dear Ilya, Leila, and others,
Thank you for your response. Unfortunately, I am not programmer, and I can't help you with the development. I only know that Tools had severe problems in the past, and it may not be a very reliable solution because, if something happens to the server, you won't have direct control and won't be able to solve the problem quickly. I had enough trouble when map scripts for Wikivoyage were running there.
I have spoken to our jury members, and their request is two-fold. First, the jury tool should be fully operational and stable before the contest and not 1.5 months after its end. Second, it is highly desirable to start the grading already in September, because processing 20,000 photos in 25 days would be difficult.
When I am writing about alternatives, I also mean that the grading can be organized with a very simple system of galleries and grading sheets that lacks the nice graphical interface, but works reliably and directly on Commons. And it perfectly fits our needs mentioned above. After our recent WLE experience I seriously think that such a primitive system will save us a lot of time and nerves. However, let's wait until the end of August and see where we are.
From my side, I can test the system in the end of August and write my comments about its usability. It will also help me to decide whether we use WLX jury tool for WLM this year.
Sincerely, Alexander
PS. Thanks for submitting the Phabricator tickets!
On 03.08.2016 11:38, Ilya Korniyko wrote:
I'll add on
- Creating next round - sorry for latency. This is already
implemented. On July 16 as Alexander mentioned himself
- Tool unavailability
** I installed monit service to reload jury tool and mysql when it goes down. Will have to wait and see if this helps. Before this I tried upstart and systemd configurations that also have respawn option. Unfortunately they worked on Ubuntu/Debian/Centos 7, but not on Centos 6 that is on WMUA's server, so I have to look for other tool and used monit for this. ** Tool is already deployed on Tool Labs - https://tools.wmflabs.org/wlxjury/auth
- [T141908 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T141908] Restriction
that users have contest assigned to them and cannot be added to another - will be fixed by end of the week.
- [T141909 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T141909] Complete
export from the jury tool. It is actually available in the form of exporting each juror rating or selection separately and overall rating for rating rounds. What is suggested is to have overall number of jurors that selected an image in the selection round and (Leila's suggestion) one cross table with images as rows, jurors as columns and rating/selections as cell. This is a trivial change as everything is already loaded in statistics module, I'll just to have to output these specific fields. Also will be done by end of the week.
Regarding alternate tool. Overall I think it's always good to have alternative and understand what we have. I know at least two tools which can to be good -
- Israel jury tool by User:Ynhockey https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Ynhockey (his own claim)
- Germany jury tool - http://tools.wmflabs.org/jury/ (Germany has lots of images and usually select winners fast, so I hope their tool is good)
Unfortunately I have not seen them, and their sources are not published.
Regarding developing of some completely new tool. I don't think it is a serious option. It will be very effort consuming and most certainly will not provide a better tool than already existing ones. At least for this years WLM.
Regards, Ilya
On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Lily <lilyofthewest.wikimedia@gmail.com mailto:lilyofthewest.wikimedia@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Alexander and others, :) *What I did in the past 2+ days* I reviewed your comments carefully and talked with a subset of the WLM international team including Ilya about the issues you have raised. I also reached out to few people outside of the team, to hear their thoughts and experiences, and here I am proposing the next steps. *Next steps* * Ilya will be looking to onboard one person to work with him on the code-base. This person will also create the redundancy that you mentioned in your notes earlier. Ideally, between Ilya and this person, the response time will be "same-day" except for non-critical requests. (If you know Scala or you know Java and you are passionate to get to the Scala world, please contact Ilya, and cc me.) * Ilya will give it a try to move the code-base to Tools this week. This will make sure that the service will have a standard up-time we can count on. There are three tasks associated with this effort: T141910, T124902, T141908. You can find them at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/view/2005/. Ilya and I will review the tasks at the end of this week and re-assess the time they require. * Given the time crunch, Ilya and I discussed pursuing a plan B or an alternative tool that the international team can work on while Ilya is busy fixing bugs and improving WLX in the coming weeks. Based on this conversation, I have started reaching out to the owners of the 5 other jury tools. In the coming days, my attention will be focused on assessing where these tools are at the moment, and figuring out if offering one of them as an alternative makes sense. We also discussed the option of developing another tool. Basically, all options are on the table with plan b at the moment. * I will do my best to send updates to wikilovesmonuments public list about the progress with regards to the jury tool. If you don't hear from me and you want to hear more, please ask on the list, and I will get back to you there. :) *Help needed* We have a short time before the start of the contest, and I want us to feel confident that we will have a solid tool for everyone when we start on Sep. 1. We cannot do this alone though: * If we are to adapt any of the current tools or create a new tool, we are under a time crunch. If you can help with usability testing of the tool we will work on under time constraints, please let me know off-list. * We also may need help for further developing one of the current tools, or creating a new one. If you have time to help with that under the current time constraints, please email me off-list with information about the languages you are comfortable with and maybe a GitHub repository of (a sample of) your past work. And last but not least, I want to assure you that coming up with a solution for the jury tool(s) that we can use more smoothly during this year's WLM contest has a high priority for the international team. You have our commitments here. :) Best, Leila, on behalf of the WLM international team On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 7:22 AM, Lily <lilyofthewest.wikimedia@gmail.com <mailto:lilyofthewest.wikimedia@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi Alexander, Thank you for sharing your experience. We will review your comments in the WLM international team and will get back to you by 2016-08-03. In terms of the timelines, there is a general understanding in the team that we'd like to have a fully functional jury tool before WLM kicks off on Sep. 1. Otherwise, we will have many sleepless nights and create many more of those for others. It's our high priority to avoid that. :) Best, Leila, on behalf of WLM international team On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 6:55 AM, Alexander Tsirlin <altsirlin@gmail.com <mailto:altsirlin@gmail.com>> wrote: We had very bad experience with using the WLX jury tool this year. I described it at length here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons_talk:WLX_Jury_Tool Several possible solutions are also mentioned on that page. I would like to hear your opinion about this situation. Could anyone help Ilya with developing and maintaining the jury tool, and make sure that it works at it should work? If we are planning to meet a very sharp deadline of October 25 for WLM photos, the jury tool should work absolutely smoothly, and user support has to be very prompt. Or it would be good to know already now that we can't rely on the jury tool, and alternative solutions should be searched for. Sincerely, Alexander _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org -- User: LilyOfTheWest -- User: LilyOfTheWest _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "WLX Russia organizers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to wlx-russia+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com mailto:wlx-russia+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to wlx-russia@googlegroups.com mailto:wlx-russia@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wlx-russia/CAN8OKLZdymV7xTTJj-8X9BaLxticDy... https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/wlx-russia/CAN8OKLZdymV7xTTJj-8X9BaLxticDys7geY1wG0dTgxFS9GYpw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
wikilovesearth@lists.wikimedia.org