> Message: 2
> Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 11:39:20 +0200
> From: Niklas Laxstr?m <niklas.laxstrom(a)gmail.com>
> To: Wikimedia developers <wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] 2012 Q1 Extension Page Review Drive
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> On 21 January 2012 05:21, Gregory Varnum <gregory.varnum(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> > WikiProject Extensions is presenting our first ever "Extension Page Review Drive" - http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:WikiProject_Extensions/Projects/Page_…
> I'm not convinced that the practice of listing all hooks used by the
> extension in the extension page is useful. It's bound to be always
> outdated and seems a lot of work for little benefit.
> Apart from that I updated one of my extensions and will probably do
> few others :)
> Niklas Laxstr?m
Personally I can of like it when extensions list their hooks. The
extension gets sorted into categories based on that. From there its
easy to see:
*Typical ways extensions use that hook (useful if you plan to modify
something related to that hook. OTOH no replacement for just grepping
through all the extensions)
*Roughly how popular that hook is
*A lot of places to find examples of how to use such a hook (useful if
you're a newbie)
Of course for things like FlaggedRevs with 2 million hooks, that
starts to become impractical.
Earlier today, while fixing some network congestion problem with the bits
servers, the varnish servers for bits.wikimedia.org went into an overload
condition. While most affected users had incorrectly formatted wiki pages
bits.wikimedia.org is to serve them), some experienced site slowness. The
whole incident lasted for 10-15 minutes.
The incident was investigated and documented, and now available at -
The Wikimedia Foundation is dedicated to a harassment-free conference
experience for everyone. I'm proposing a fairly short and standard
anti-harassment policy of the type that's becoming best practice for
tech conferences and hackathons.
I don't imagine I'll get much response on this, but just wanted to put
it out there before implementing. I intend on putting this into place
by the middle of next week, in time for the San Francisco hackathon
(starting January 20th).
Comments on the talk page, please.
Volunteer Development Coordinator
Michael wrote: Date: 2012-01-18 16:18:15 GMT (1 hour and 11 minutes ago)
> At least 2,213,922 users will never see it
> and maybe way, way more since there are many similar features on any browser or platform.
> Today, virtually NONE of my (many) friends ever noticed something changed, until i told them.
> And even with js, you can see the 'real' page popping up first before the redirect takes action. It does not
> feel like 'oops wikipedia is gone !!?' but more like just another anyyoing advert.
> You should do a straightforward real shutdown instead, and deliver a fake 404 with explanation link.
> And for several more days.
> And yes i would even block editing since this is also alerting people.
Over the past days I've been trying to get rid of the deprecated hook
LanguageGetMagic in the repo. I've updated about 60 extensions, I
estimate, to use $magicWords imported through $wgExtensionMessagesFiles,
instead of the hook.
As you may know, I'm not much of a developer, so when it gets harder, I
throw the towel in the ring... There are three extensions that make a more
esotheric use of LanguageGetMagic, that I'm not able to convert to use
$magicWords. These are:
$wgHooks['LanguageGetMagic'] = 'FlaggedRevsHooks::onLanguageGetMagic';
* LabeledSectionTransclusion/lst.php:$wgHooks['LanguageGetMagic'] =
If you can help out here, please do so. It would be much appreciated.
Next, in my opinion, would be to start throwing warnings using
wfDeprecated on use of the hook LanguageGetMagic, but I haven't really
been able to find where that could be done for a hook. If you can be of
help there, please let me know. There may also be some other deprecated
hooks that could get more attention if they would throw warnings on use.