"If people don't want to put their code through review this is scary to me"
They do get their code reviewed. The rules are however usually simple 'it needs to
work'. Not everyone has time to spend a gazillion hours on getting familiar with git,
gerrit, jshint, git-review, resourceloader, i18n, l10n, the actual review lag, the deploy
lag and I don't know what else.
Some ppl just want to edit categories super fast NOW. That's how these tools start and
then these people are usually done. A bit of required maintenance, but that's it, they
are editing/reviewing/categorizing again. Look at navpopups. With minor changes, that
thing has been able to run basically unsupervised since 2006 and it is one of the most
So people want to make extensions out of JS code, just do it, but some people don't
and you should respect that.
To get what you want, you need:
1: Flagged revisions/review for .css/.js wikipages
2: CSS/JS editor for wikipage with JSHint integrated etc integrated
3: i18n support for gadgets.
4: Global repositories for gadgets
5: Integrated versioning and updating for 'installed' scripts
6: Autogenerated documentation
Then ppl will come flocking.
On 18 jul. 2013, at 00:08, Jon Robson <jdlrobson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I'd really like to see a review process where
Gadgets move from Gadget
status to core. To me a Gadget is a great way to explore a new type of
functionality and prove it's worth but it comes with a cost - it's
very difficult to ensure a Gadget doesn't breaking with core changes
or with the installation of some other extension/gadget. I can imagine
this would also be the developer equivalent of a barn star - such a
promotion I'd hope would be very flattering to authors and would
encourage Gadget writing and innovation. Likewise if a gadget is not
being used we should not leave it install on a wiki.
If people don't want to put their code through review this is scary to
me - surely the standards of any code we put out to users should be of
the highest quality..? We should not be scared of code review and see
it as a positive thing that builds our knowledge up and makes us be
the best we possibly can. If this is seen as a bad thing we really
need to ask ourselves questions about the review process.
If people are scared of using Gerrit/Git we should create nicer
interfaces into it.. no?
(Note for those not familiar with what HotCat is:
On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Yuvi Panda <yuvipanda(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It's universally liked, is there almost on
every wiki, and provides a
much needed functionality. Why isn't this deployed as an extension, or
better yet - part of core, than as a gadget? Just a matter of someone
to do the work?
Yuvi Panda T
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l mailing list