On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Daniel Kinzler <daniel(a)brightbyte.de> wrote:
You really want the spam filter extensions to have
internal knowledge of
Wikibase? That seems like a nasty cross-dependency, and goes directly against
the idea of modularization and separation of concerns...
We are running into the "glue code problem" here. We need code that knows
the spam filters and about wikibase. Should it be in the spam filter, in
Wikibase, or in a separate, third extension? That would be cleanest, but a
hassle to maintain... Which way would you prefer?
I think Daniel has correctly stated the problem.
One of the directions of the Admin Tools project is to combine some of
the various tools into AbuseFilter, so I think it's safe to assume
that AbuseFilter will be around and maintained for some time, and
Wikidata could easily use the hooks it provides to do a lot of the
work providing the interface. That being said, expanding AbuseFilter
to work on non-article data has already been requested a few times, so
I think we can make AbuseFilter much easier for Wikidata, and AFT to
Maybe to start with, we can find out what functionality from
AbuseFilter there is common between AFT and Wikibase, and try to build
in most of the overlapping pieces into AbuseFilter. Then each can also
use the AbuseFilter hooks to complete the functionality?