Hi *,
just wanted to give you a quick update of the progress for developing
FlaggedRevs, as the extension is called so far:
You find the development now at:
http://svn.wikimedia.org/viewvc/mediawiki/trunk/extensions/FlaggedRevs/
The very good news is that a couple of people have shown interest in the
extension and volunteered time and code, e.g Aaron Schulz having
submitted most of the code. This means that there will be hopefully a
codebase in the end which is understood by more than one person, and is
already actively maintained by members of the community!
One can already flagg revisions from different pages on the wiki, and
there is code in place to select revisions to display. It is using the
logging facility as well.
Internally there is still quite some work to do, e.g. hardcoded settings
will need to be made configurable, page content including transcluded
content is frozen at the moment, a mechanism that may be replaced by
something more dynamic etc.
Cheers,
Joerg
Hiho,
as you maybe know, it was St. Patrick's Day on Friday, which means
that Jörg, who lives in Dublin, has taken the opportunity to do some
hiking this weekend. Next week, he will be not available due to
intense travelling for other projects, however, on the ferry he will
have time to do stuff for us.
Nevertheless, he is confident to have an unoptimized prototype ready
until easter.
Bye,
Philipp
There will be a big Board + Staff meeting in Florida next weekend. It
would be really helpful to be able to show something with regard to
revision annotation / stable versions. Will it be possible to get some
prototype or at least mock-up up by March 14?
--
Peace & Love,
Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic
Don't wonder about the broken signature in my previous post. It was modified
by the mailing list software. :p It inserted a ">" at "from the beginings on.
That's what I want to make sure." I have seen this bug on other Wikimedia
lists. Maybe a config issue...
Daniel Arnold / Arnomane
Hi *,
just a short question:
If there is a page, and User A comes along and flaggs it, after which
User B comes along and flags it another way, what do we do?
a) User B overrides User A, we only store the latest flag
b) User Bs flag is used, because it was the latest (keeping both flags)
c) Apply some method to determine an average
d) Show all flags
What do you think?
Cheers,
Joerg
Philipp&Joerg -
could you elaborate on:
> i) First adapt the database model to the new features (article
> history, new user groups).
Currently user groups are not defined in the database, but in
includes/DefaultSettings.php through the $wgGroupPermissions array.
The _membership_ in particular groups is defined in the user_groups
table. What need is there to change the database?
Brion was not on the list yet, so I just added him.
--
Peace & Love,
Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of
the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
"An old, rigid civilization is reluctantly dying. Something new, open,
free and exciting is waking up." -- Ming the Mechanic
Some summary comments about things brought up on this list:
Erik wrote about some details, which attributes may be useful/are intented.
> tag comments: Should the tag support a comment field which explains
> why the revision was tagged in a certain way?
I think this would cause some interface problems:
a)
The history would contain multiple comments for a single version, as wan't to
tag an older version without making this the newest one.
b)
The Changelog entry isn't that often used currently. As it is intented to
allow the basic ("sighted") flag to all users with 30 edits/30 days (or a
similat threshold) and to allow tagging on save as well (if the user did
check the sighted button) this would cause more harm than benefit.
c)
So maybe only for the "checked" version tag which can only be applied by a
tiny group of appointed users could use such a thing. Buteven in this case
I'd advocate for some reedit feature of history comments (something we
definetely could reuse in other context, such as correcting third party
credit afterwards right in the history).
> permissions: Which user groups have permission to set the tag?
The "sighted" version is an automatic threshold such as 30 days/30 edits.
The "checked" version people should be an appointed group different from
admins. Thatfor I advocate beureaucrats to be able to appoint those people.
> implicit tagging:
IMHO no. Per default the checkbox setting these flags on editing should be
unchecked (but maybe configurable via user settings). People often edit an
article several times until they are happy. So something like "whoops I did
automatically set sighted flag on a half done version" is not good.
@Joerg Baach (and others):
Are there any further mockups wanted (beside the ones already ceated by me) If
so which one?
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Mockup-sighted-version-diff.pnghttp://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Mockup-sighted-version…http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Sighted-version-mockup…
@all: Are there any other mockups about that?
Chers,
Arnomane / Daniel Arnold
Hi *,
just wanted to give a word - I am still alive, reading and playing
around with the mediawiki software, short of creating my first code.
Things are getting a bit clearer, some stuff is a bit surprising
(following my mysql.log).
Tomorrow I will be mostly offline, heading to London, but having stuff
on my Laptop on the ferry. I will give you a note on wednesday, maybe
already some first code bits then, but most likely quite a couple of
questions. ;-)
Yours,
Joerg
