Thanks,
I do not know php yet, but I have tryed it anyway, it gives me syntax mistake
wfRunHooks( 'SkinTemplateTabs', array( $this, &$content_actions ) );
} else { //THIS IS THE LINE,
//IT MIGHT BE BECAUSE OF THE BUG WHICH FOLLOWS
/* show special page tab */
$content_actions[$this->mTitle->getNamespaceKey()] = array(
'class' => 'selected',
'text' => wfMsg('nstab-special'),
'href' => $wgRequest->getRequestURL(), // @bug 2457, 2510 //!!!?
);
wfRunHooks( 'SkinTemplateBuildContentActionUrlsAfterSpecialPage', array(
&$this, &$content_actions ) );
I will be trying.
Hey,
I'm looking for a way to collect existing extension meta-data from the SVN
repo and maybe also the extension pages on MediaWiki.org. Does anyone know
of scripts/tools that already do this?
I need this data for the Distribution extension [0], for which I want some
minimal functionality working before the end of GSoC (one week from now).
Since I don't have much time any help which such a script would be
appreciated, as parsing data like this is something I don't have a lot of
experience with.
[0]
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Extension:Distribution
Cheers
--
Jeroen De Dauw
* http://blog.bn2vs.com
* http://wiki.bn2vs.com
Don't panic. Don't be evil. 50 72 6F 67 72 61 6D 6D 69 6E 67 20 34 20 6C 69
66 65!
--
On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 14:16, Roan Kattouw <roan.kattouw(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> This is true, and this, not usability team exclusivity, is the
> important difference here. testwiki is really only for things that we
> deem ready to go live and want to check one more time before we
> accidentally let a typo wreck stuff, so code that goes there has to be
> pretty solid already. prototype is a completely separate machine that
> we can play around with to our heart's content, so mostly we can just
> throw stuff on there and see what happens.
>
> Roan Kattouw (Catrope)
>
Hello!
Would a "prototype wiki" be a good place to make it possible for Portuguese
community to test the Language Conversion in practice?
We are considering[1][2] the possibility of using the system to handle
regional differences in the written Portuguese, but it seems that the
editors need more contact with the system before they can decide in favour
or agains an efective use of the conversion system at pt.wikipedia.
We have made some drafts of the PHP code[3] which is needed to start, and
set of possible global conversion rules for some variants[4].
What should we do to have a prototype wiki for this, if that is possible?
Thanks,
Helder
[1]
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Esplanada/propostas/Conversor_de_idi…
[2]
http://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:%E4%BA%92%E5%8A%A9%E5%AE%A2%E6%A0%88…
[3]
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Esplanada/propostas/Conversor_de_idi…
[4]
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Esplanada/propostas/Conversor_de_idi…
Cross-posted to
<http://techblog.wikimedia.org/2010/07/mediawiki-version-statistics/>
Some kind people at Qualys have surveyed versions of open source web
apps present on the web, including MediaWiki. Here is the relevant
page from their presentation:
http://wimg.co.uk/3jK.png
For the original see:
https://community.qualys.com/docs/DOC-1401
And the press release:
<http://www.qualys.com/company/newsroom/newsreleases/usa/view/2010-07-28/>
They make the point that 95% of MediaWiki installations have a
"serious vulnerability", whereas only 4% of WordPress installations
do. While WordPress's web-based upgrade utility certainly has a
positive impact on security, I feel I should point out that what
WordPress counts as a serious vulnerability does not align with
MediaWiki's definition of the same term.
For instance, if a web-based user could execute arbitrary PHP code on
the server, compromising all data and user accounts, we would count
that as the most serious sort of vulnerability, and we would do an
immediate release to fix it. We're proud of the fact that we haven't
had any such vulnerability in a stable release since 1.5.3 (December
2005).
However in WordPress, they count this as a feature, and all
administrators can do it. Similarly, WordPress avoids the difficult
problem of sanitising HTML and CSS while preserving a rich feature set
by simply allowing all authors to post raw HTML.
If you are running MediaWiki in a CMS-like mode, with whitelist edit
and account creation restricted, then I think it's fair to say that in
terms of security, you're better off with MediaWiki 1.14.1 or later
than you are with the latest version of WordPress.
However, the statistics presented by Qualys show that an alarming
number of people are running versions of MediaWiki older than 1.14.1,
which was the most recent fix for an XSS vulnerability exploitable
without special privileges. There is certainly room for us to do better.
We have a new installer project in development, which we hope to
release in 1.17. It includes a feature which encourages users to sign
up for our release announcements mailing list. But maybe we need to do
more. Should we take a leaf from WordPress's book, and nag
administrators with a prominent notice when they are not using the
latest version? Such a feature would require MediaWiki to "dial home",
which is controversial in our developer community.
-- Tim Starling
Hey,
I figured I can use the same code as ExtensionDistributor for creating
packages for the deployment extensions. The code for creating archives and
going through the svn repo is not in the extensions directory on svn as far
as I can determine though. Where can I find it? If it's not publicly
available anywhere at the moment, can it be made so?
Cheers
--
Jeroen De Dauw
* http://blog.bn2vs.com
* http://wiki.bn2vs.com
Don't panic. Don't be evil. 50 72 6F 67 72 61 6D 6D 69 6E 67 20 34 20 6C 69
66 65!
--
2010/8/6 Roan Kattouw <roan.kattouw(a)gmail.com>
>
> When it has passed review, I suppose we could set up a few wikis at
> prototype.wikimedia.org and test it there. It was originally set up
> for the usability initiative but it seems to be used for increasingly
> random testing purposes now, and we have no other proper place for
> this.
>
Just curious: There's also http://test.wikipedia.org/ . What's the
difference between it and prototype?
I know that prototype has different language versions and i'm not sure
about test in this regard. And except that?
--
אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
Amir Elisha Aharoni
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
"We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
Guillaume Paumier wrote:
> I don't think there is an official Board resolution about the use of
> proprietary technologies on Wikimedia projects. However, Brion and Erik
> have been known to have a pretty strong opinion on that, and I believe
> Danese and a large part of the WMF tech staff are in the same place.
>
> A few relevant links for a historical perspective:
>
> * "We should permit Flash video playback" thread on foundation-l in 2007
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.commons/2220/
>
> * "Software policy draft" thread on foundation-l in 2007
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.foundation/19547/
>
> * The actual draft:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Draft_Statement_of_Principles_Rega…
There is nothing in that, or in
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_format_policy which suggests that
we can't use Flash for microphone audio upload, is there? Are people
aware of http://haxe.org/doc/intro and
http://www.gnu.org/software/gnash/ ? The bulk of Flash is no longer
proprietary. I know there are patent issues around some flash video
formats, but at this point I have little confidence that any of the
major browser authors will provide HTML microphone upload in the next
five years. Is there any reason to believe otherwise?
Casey Brown wrote:
> Another, somewhat more recent one:
> http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/October_3-5,_2008#Open_Standard…>
>
> "The board asked Sue to have Mike Godwin revise the draft policy to a
> version that would make it clear that only free formats are
> permissible."
>
> Did that ever happen? (Or did anything useful ever come about of it?)
Clearly not, so I am asking Sue and Mike directly by adding them as addressees.
I have been working on microphone audio upload since before the
previous decade: http://www.w3.org/TR/device-upload -- I have also
offered to donate some nice ActionScript microphone upload code to the
Foundation which compiles with Haxe if the builder is willing to do
such things as replace the Speex vocodec constant with the equivalent
integer. It doesn't run under gnash yet, but I believe it will soon.
(I don't think there would be consensus for dropping Wikimedia support
for closed-source browsers, as a related matter.)
In return, I have asked the Foundation to spend $2,500 on a contract
with Yaron Koren to enable GIFT -- http://microformats.org/wiki/gift
-- in the Quiz extension. That would be particularly useful if the
efforts to ask the Open University to re-license the several thousand
hours of courseware which they currently publish under cc-by-nc-sa, to
cc-by-sa or cc-by succeed. I have asked multiple parties, including
Board members and the UK Chapter to work on that simultaneously. I
believe at least two of them are working on that effort. In any case,
GIFT is far more compact and more wikitext-like than the existing Quiz
extension to Mediawiki which is bulky and suffers from lack of use in
more than 90 assessments on Wikiversity, for example, while GIFT
assessments can be produced from the assessments in any Moodle course
using Moodle's export function.
However, even though Wayne Mackintosh of the 25,000 teacher-strong
WikiEducator and OER Foundation wrote to Erik back on March 28, saying
they were "very supportive" of the GIFT compatibility project, Erik
has so far hesitated, saying that he wants to see additional support
from the community.
So please, if you think GIFT assessment support and/or Flash
microphone audio upload is a good idea (and I would repeat that the
Spanish Wiktonary still has no audio pronunciation for "hola" even
though the English Wiktionary does) then please let Erik know. Thank
you!
Sincerely,
James Salsman
Sorry about bugging the list about it, but can anyone please explain
the reason for not enabling the Interlanguage extension?
See bug 15607 -
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15607
I believe that enabling it will be very beneficial for many projects
and many people expressed their support of it. I am not saying that
there are no reasons to not enable it; maybe there is a good reason,
but i don't understand it. I also understand that there are many other
unsolved bugs, but this one seems to have a ready and rather simple
solution.
I am only sending it to raise the problem. If you know the answer, you
may comment at the bug page.
Thanks in advance.
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni
heb: http://haharoni.wordpress.com | eng: http://aharoni.wordpress.com
cat: http://aprenent.wordpress.com | rus: http://amire80.livejournal.com
"We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace." - T. Moore
Hi everybody!
I have been working on interwiki transclusion for several weeks on my
branch and got some very interesting results (most of the stuff is
working, now!).
What I currently need is to create a globaltemplatelinks that will
allow a wiki to invalidate the cache of the pages which transclude a
distant template when this template is modified.
I have written my proposal for the structure and behavior of this
system here: [1].
Can you please read it and give your opinion?
Thanks in advance
Best regards
--
Peter Potrowl
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Peter17
[1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Peter17/Reasonably_efficient_interwiki_t…
Hi all
I'm looking for a extension to implement a cornell notes(
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornell_Notes). do you have any idea?
--
Thank you for your wonderful support. Any question let me know.
BR/Yin
