Hi, in the past we have been discussing the need to update
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_hub
Here is a basic proposal to get started. If we agree on the main idea the implementation will be easier. Perhaps we can do it edit by edit during some weeks, instead of an ambitious full rewrite:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Developer_hub#Developer_Hub_update
Once we are done with this we will decide whether something needs to be done about https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_developer_hub or not. My personal opinion today is that it is simpler and better to have all software development info under mediawiki.org - and referenced through a one and only Developer Hub. But I'm open to be convinced with better arguments. :)
PS: next week I'm on not-Xmas holidays, quite offline. Looking forward to seeing more thoughts and offers to help by Feb 18.
Are you going to reference software that has nothing to do with mediawiki on mediawiki.org as well? if not, then keep the hub we have on meta...
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 7:54 PM, Quim Gil qgil@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi, in the past we have been discussing the need to update
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/**Developer_hubhttp://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_hub
Here is a basic proposal to get started. If we agree on the main idea the implementation will be easier. Perhaps we can do it edit by edit during some weeks, instead of an ambitious full rewrite:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/**Talk:Developer_hub#Developer_**Hub_updatehttp://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Developer_hub#Developer_Hub_update
Once we are done with this we will decide whether something needs to be done about https://meta.wikimedia.org/**wiki/Wikimedia_developer_hubhttps://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_developer_hubor not. My personal opinion today is that it is simpler and better to have all software development info under mediawiki.org - and referenced through a one and only Developer Hub. But I'm open to be convinced with better arguments. :)
PS: next week I'm on not-Xmas holidays, quite offline. Looking forward to seeing more thoughts and offers to help by Feb 18.
-- Quim Gil Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/**User:Qgilhttp://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
______________________________**_________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikitech-lhttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Petr Bena benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
Are you going to reference software that has nothing to do with mediawiki on mediawiki.org as well? if not, then keep the hub we have on meta...
I thought it was decided quite a long time ago that meta was for discussing the projects and not a place to keep random tech documentation, or am I mistaken?
- Ryan
this is not a documentation, this is a hub for people who are interested to participate on development of any wikimedia related software project, such as huggle, wm-bot, AWB and so
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:11 AM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Petr Bena benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
Are you going to reference software that has nothing to do with mediawiki on mediawiki.org as well? if not, then keep the hub we have on meta...
I thought it was decided quite a long time ago that meta was for discussing the projects and not a place to keep random tech documentation, or am I mistaken?
- Ryan
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Ryan Lane wrote:
I thought it was decided quite a long time ago that meta was for discussing the projects and not a place to keep random tech documentation, or am I mistaken?
The issue, as I understand it, is that there's a good amount of non-MediaWiki-related technical documentation that people are now trying to shoehorn into mediawiki.org, as there isn't a better place for it. A sizable source of these pages is Wikimedia Foundation engineering-related documentation, some of which clearly belong on mediawiki.org, but some of which clearly do not. Erik and others seem to believe that centralizing everything at mediawiki.org (and ignoring or expanding that wiki's stated purpose) will be less confusing/better in the long run. I'm doubtful.
There was a proposal (in 2012, I think) to expand a "Wikitech" wiki, but it seems to have died fairly quickly. I'm not sure why.
A generic developer hub would logically be placed at Meta-Wiki. However, if the reality is that the developer hub is focused primarily at MediaWiki, having a page at Meta-Wiki where every link points back to mediawiki.org is a bit silly.
A lot of this could use more thought, but nobody really seems willing to plan this out and then execute the plan.
MZMcBride
Hi,
On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 8:51 PM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
The issue, as I understand it, is that there's a good amount of non-MediaWiki-related technical documentation that people are now trying to shoehorn into mediawiki.org, as there isn't a better place for it. A sizable source of these pages is Wikimedia Foundation engineering-related documentation, some of which clearly belong on mediawiki.org, but some of which clearly do not.
This is how I understand the issue as well.
There was a proposal (in 2012, I think) to expand a "Wikitech" wiki, but it seems to have died fairly quickly. I'm not sure why.
The reasons as I recall them were:
* Expanding the scope of wikitech would require to open it up (it's been a fishbowl wiki for years), which would open it to vandalism, including subtle ones. A way to mitigate this could be to use a flavor of FlaggedRevs, but that thought made people shiver.
* Usernames / SUL: Wikitech needs to stay separate from the cluster, because the Ops team needs to be able to use it during an outage. This means no SUL and no benefiting from the help of stewards and their nifty tools to handle less-subtle-and-more-disruptive vandalism. A way to mitigate this could be to have wikitech on the cluster, and a read-only copy outside the cluster.
* Their was also a wish to merge the content of wikitech and that of labsconsole, because there's some redundancy (and because it makes sense, as Labs is a staging area for production, labsconsole documents Labs, and wikitech documents production). The best way to do that was thought to be to merge wikitech's content into labsconsole, and maybe rename labconsole to wikitech afterwards. But there's a lot of crap on wikitech, and it should be cleaned up before a merged is attempted. The Ops team is already convinced that wikitech's content needs to be cleaned up, but they have more pressing work.
Somebody add to this / correct me if I'm wrong. If I remember more, I'll send a follow-up.
A generic developer hub would logically be placed at Meta-Wiki. However, if the reality is that the developer hub is focused primarily at MediaWiki, having a page at Meta-Wiki where every link points back to mediawiki.org is a bit silly.
A lot of this could use more thought, but nobody really seems willing to plan this out and then execute the plan.
Work on this has indeed been deprioritized in favor of other activities like Tech ambassadors and volunteer product managers. If someone's interested, I can probably find a few draft plans that were discussed last year, and publish them somewhere public.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org