Hoi,
The answer seems obvious: "in the same way it has always been done". There
are a few things that are quite obvious, the community will not be asked
when things need to be changed because they are broken. There have been
indications that the template stuff has been broken and as it is now clear
that it is can and does break the system and it will be changed. There is a
discussion going on on the Wikitech list and that is where the community can
be found that has a clue.
When you consider MediaWiki, it is used in many languages and for many
projects. Some basic functionality is just not good enough. I am grateful
for the Usability Initiative but for many languages the issues it addresses
are already too sophisticated. You may remember my rants about Lingala..
They do not have a community because we do not even fully support the Latin
script. At last weeks Open Translation Tools conference I met Dwayne Bailey
the leading light on internationalisation and localisation for African
languages and he is willing to help us make MediaWiki ready for African
languages.
MediaWiki is open source software. This means that you pay for what what is
not there. You can pay by suffering and you can pay by developing software.
When you think you know what the community needs, you can do your utmost to
make it happen. I have been active in the development of software and I
consider the LocalisationUpdate extension extremely relevant for the
community that does not rely on the English language.
All in all, the community is only dependent on the Foundation for the
assessment of code. When functionality is Brion proof, you may find that the
community sets the agenda.
Thanks,
GerardM
2009/7/1 Brian <Brian.Mingus(a)colorado.edu>
Going forward, how does the Foundation plan to make
large changes to the
software in full consultation with the community consensus?
Is the assumption that all of the members of the community who are
knowledgeable and interested have already signed up to the relevant mailing
lists and all that is needed is to send out a quick 'ping' and get their
thoughts?
What constitutes the community when it comes to the software?
Or is this just a guideline that has been on Jimbo's user page for many
years which is not really relevant since laymen should not really be
involved in technical decisions? Is there anyone at the Foundation who
currently takes this principle seriously? Honestly? What about the
developers - are they aware of and actively engaged in implementing this
principle?
Does the Foundation feel that it doesn't actually need to consult the
community? It can determine the technically best solution for the projects
and then implement it without soliciting feedback from as many people as
possible?
What would constitute due diligence in contacting the community? For
example, suppose that the Foundation had determined that there were 5
really
good solutions to a problem in the software and that they take full
consultation seriously. Could you then present those 5 solutions to the
community en masse using a survey, analyze the results and choose a winner
(or have a runoff?).
How large of a change to the software requires full consultation?
After consulting the community, does the Foundation feel it is within its
power to then choose something different?
Does the Foundation take the requirement that all changes to the software
must be gradual and reversible seriously, or not? What does that mean to
you?
Thanks,
Brian
_______________________________________________
foundation-l mailing list
foundation-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l