On 09/02/2015 09:21 AM, David Gerard wrote:
On 2 September 2015 at 07:27, Dan Garry dgarry@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 1 September 2015 at 23:21, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks. So now we'll have two unmaintained extensions, LQT and Flow.
To quote Danny's email directly, "Flow will be maintained and supported". Your supposition that the extension will be unmaintained is not correct.
As a third-party MediaWiki tarball user, I'm slightly annoyed because RationalWIki took on LQT originally because WMF made it sound like it was definitely the future yep no worries. As the current sysadmin I desperately would love to set LQT on fire and put it in a bin and was hoping Flow would be the supported option. Bah, how annoying ...
Flow *is* the supported option, as stated in Danny's original email.
Did the stuff to port LQT threads/pages to Flow ever make it to production quality?
Yes. We've done a lot of work to ensure that neither LQT users nor LQT talk pages have been left behind.
OTOH, the problems outlined in this message are pretty much exactly what experienced Wikipedia users said when Flow was started - you need to be able to cut'n'paste slabs of wikitext (or parsoid HTML5 or whatever VE actually copies to the clipboard) from the article to the talk page, which means something VEish on talk too.
Flow has VE support. However, simply having a free-form area is not the full solution. We need to actually make these workflows easier for users (not require them to copy and paste templates around), which is the next step.
Matt