I try to sum up the discussion and reply to some arguments:
2010/6/13 Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com:
- iw_trans - I don't think this needs to become more than a
boolean like it is. If we allow transwiki inclusion, we'll have to use a DB or API connection. Since a DB connection will always be preferable to an HTTP request to the API, it would be safe to use the existence of a db name as an indicator to use it, else fall back to the API.
I can keep iw_trans as a boolean, but I thought it would be a good idea to use it as a "selector" * 0 -> no interwiki transclusion * 1 -> transclusion by API * 2 -> transclusion by direct DB access through LBFactory
as it is possible to add new kinds of transclusion later (eg. 3 -> transclusion by DB file access, in case of a SQLite DB, etc.)
2010/6/13 Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com:
- iw_dbname / iw_api - You could probably combine these into
one column. It could store a value like "dbname=abc;api=http://foo.com/etc" which would be loaded and split when the Interwiki object is constructed.
I agree that it is possible, but I don't see the advantages of doing so...
2010/6/14 Platonides Platonides@gmail.com:
Do we need *both* values? It could simply contain http://foo.com/etc (API) or mysql://localhost:3306/abc (dbname)
I don't need both values for the function I'm writing, but as Chad said, he suggested to add this kind of fields some time ago, so, I suppose both fields can be useful for different purposes.
By the way, this is related to https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20646
2010/6/16 Domas Mituzas midom.lists@gmail.com:
I somewhat didn't jump here, as we simply don't use interwiki table on WMF sites, so the topic was out of interest. :)
If we want to enable interwiki transclusion on WMF wikis using the code I'm writing, we'll need to use the interwiki table on those wikis... And we'll need to start a discussion about the interwiki prefixes to use.
-- Peter Potrowl http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Peter17