Sent from my iPhone
On Dec 8, 2013, at 10:22 PM, Rob Lanphier robla@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Jeroen De Dauw jeroendedauw@gmail.comwrote:
On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Bryan Davis bd808@wikimedia.org wrote:
Finding a way to separate MW the library from MW the application may be a solution to this conflict. I don't think this would be a trivial project, but it doesn't seem impossible either.
That'd be fanatic if it happened for many other reasons as well. For all intents and purposes it is a big caste in the sky though. I expect this to not happen in the coming years, unless there is a big shift in opinion on what constitutes good software design and architecture in the community.
It sounds like you're retreating from an argument you haven't even started yet. A successful proposal will likely be one that can be executed incrementally without huge workflow shifts, so there may have been resistance in the past to a particular "blow it all up and start over" strategy. However, I haven't yet heard anyone put forward the argument that MediaWiki's monolithic architecture is the correct long-term architecture.
I largely agree with Bryan that separating MediaWiki the library from MediaWiki the application is something we should consider tackling. I have a quibble with the wording: it should be "MediaWiki the set of libraries", not a single library, and it seems like we could start teasing them out one at a time if we can agree on a general framework under which this would be done.
Rob _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Not to be a downer but isn't this one of the things x windows did that upset people? I'm not arguing that this approach is doomed, just that care must be taken. Honestly I don't know the situation well enough to have a super strong opinion.
Nik