The 'version' key isn't used in the release process, but it is still displayed in Special:Version. Although, I totally agree with removing it, as it often isn't updated, and so just ends up being confusing.
The other thing I was wondering about adding was that non-Gerrit extensions should be added to the list in https://github.com/MWStake/nonwmf-extensions so that they can be used in things like the code search tool and extjsonuploader. That sort of goes against the first two points on the page (about how extensions must use Phabricator and Gerrit), so I'm not sure.
Hey! I actively contributed to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Best_practices_for_extensions in the past. I reviewed the most recent changes for my WMDE TechWish team and can say that I'm pretty happy with how the page turned out. Some minor suggestions, though: * MUST: extension.json must name the code's <code>"license-name":</code> according to https://spdx.org/licenses/. * MUST: The <code>"config":</code> section in extension.json must list all configuration options with their default <code>"value":</code> and a brief <code>"description":</code>. Yes, I would seriously make this a must, knowing that most extensions currently miss the documentation part. * Is it worth asking to remove the <code>"version":</code> from extension.json when it's not actively used (any more) in the release process of an extension? * What about CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md? Isn't this required by now? * I care a lot about "readable code", but the current sentence is not very meaningful. I mean, who writes code that is intentionally _unreadable_? Maybe we can suggest making code _expressive_, so it's easy to understand for later developers, as well as follow the SOLID principles? * What does "standard internationalization systems in MediaWiki" refer to? The message system is already mentioned above. If there are more systems we should list them. * I suggest to add "or use HtmlArmor" to the sentence about wikitext vs. HTML. * The sentence "Use global MediaWiki configuration such as read-only mode" leaves me a little puzzled. What is this about? The read-only mode seems super specific – I never used it for anything. Are there better examples? * One place mentions "or stuff". Not sure which "stuff" is meant. It's probably better to remove the word. There is also some discussion about "what if I don't (want to) comply?" at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Wovr2kqb7qwhztwu. While these are interesting questions, personally I don't think they should block us from moving forward. I mean, these best practices exist whether or not all existing code conforms to them, whether or not they are documented, and whether or not we call the documentation a "draft". This is just about having them documented. It's not like we plan to rename the page to "Requirements for extensions". Still it might be worth adding a sentence like "this is only for extensions listed on mediawiki.org". Best Thiemo _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list -- wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email to wikitech-l-leave@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikitech-l.lists.wikimedia.org/