find many of the staff are just not there to be found. While the community
is this big mass of people, it would be really valuable to have a place with
a picture, a short cv and an organogram. Much of it is there but it is not
kept up to date.
It is really important that people who work for the WMF are knowable. The
notion that only permanent staff should be included is imho not helpful,
some are quite visible and important to the community as well.
On 16 October 2010 12:34, Roan Kattouw <roan.kattouw(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2010/10/16 Alex <mrzmanwiki(a)gmail.com>om>:
Why does this need some elaborate plan that will
take multiple months to
implement? The infrastructure for actually doing code review is already
there; it just needs someone to actually do it.
I didn't mean to suggest an elaborate plan needs to be concocted, nor
that /implementing/ it would take months. Executing it most probably
would, though. By way of example, my "plan" is give below. It's mostly
obvious stuff, but I see how people might disagree on the order or
timing of things, which is why I think there should be (some)
discussion before settling down on something. I didn't really want to
put this in this thread because I think that discussion deserves its
own, but here it is anyway:
1. Catch up with the code review backlog (about 1,200 revs currently).
I expect this to be entirely uncontroversial, and this can be (and is
being) done while we argue about the rest
2. When trunk is fully reviewed and we feel it's probably stable,
release 1.17.0beta1 and deploy it on Wikimedia
3. Fix the numerous bugs that will inevitably rear their ugly heads
when 8 months' (or more) worth of code is deployed
4. Once deployment stabilizes, rebranch from trunk (picking up trunk
changes since the last deployment that weren't specifically aimed at
fixing the site), release and deploy that.
5. Repeat 2-4 until we feel comfortable releasing the currently
deployed code as 1.17.0
6. From there on out, do weekly deployments of trunk
Exactly as MZMcBride feared, this is an "after X" plan, where X is the
next release. I disagree that that necessarily implies
procrastination, however. Sometimes there are valid reasons to do X
first, then Y, and I think this is such a case.
Roan Kattouw (Catrope)
Wikitech-l mailing list