On 02/24/2013 02:43 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
Mark, your assumptions about LQT are blatantly wrong or in other words it's just wishful thinking.
Ok, I can accept that.
But your next statement seems to contradict this.
Here is what I thought I said:
given where LQT is used (some WMF sites and, as you point out, TWN), we can assume it will be safe to use LQT against the HEAD of git for the foreseeable future.
People shouldn't expect great new features, but they can that it will remain as usable as it is *in its current state* for the foreseeable future.
You said:
Tests are done as usual by translatewiki.net on the last code, then some volunteers take care of the worst problems: usually it's TWN staff, but few days ago Krenair has submitted fixes for a dozen major/critical bugs
I'm not sure how this doesn't match up with my assumptions. Maybe I gave the impression that I thought LQT was rock solid and bugs were being fixed quickly?
If so, that wasn't my intent. I like LQT better than the talk page format, but I have used it enough to realize that it isn't free of warts. And I realize, too, that it doesn't have a full-time paid developer devoted to it.
Instead, I was trying to figure out how much attention people are paying to it, given the places it is being used. I'm glad to see Krenair and others fixing bugs.
Mark.