Hey! I actively contributed to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Best_practices_for_extensions in the past. I reviewed the most recent changes for my WMDE TechWish team and can say that I'm pretty happy with how the page turned out. Some minor suggestions, though: * MUST: extension.json must name the code's <code>"license-name":</code> according tohttps://spdx.org/licenses/. * MUST: The <code>"config":</code> section in extension.json must list all configuration options with their default <code>"value":</code> and a brief <code>"description":</code>. Yes, I would seriously make this a must, knowing that most extensions currently miss the documentation part. * Is it worth asking to remove the <code>"version":</code> from extension.json when it's not actively used (any more) in the release process of an extension? * What about CODE_OF_CONDUCT.md? Isn't this required by now? * I care a lot about "readable code", but the current sentence is not very meaningful. I mean, who writes code that is intentionally _unreadable_? Maybe we can suggest making code _expressive_, so it's easy to understand for later developers, as well as follow the SOLID principles? * What does "standard internationalization systems in MediaWiki" refer to? The message system is already mentioned above. If there are more systems we should list them. * I suggest to add "or use HtmlArmor" to the sentence about wikitext vs. HTML. * The sentence "Use global MediaWiki configuration such as read-only mode" leaves me a little puzzled. What is this about? The read-only mode seems super specific – I never used it for anything. Are there better examples? * One place mentions "or stuff". Not sure which "stuff" is meant. It's probably better to remove the word. There is also some discussion about "what if I don't (want to) comply?" athttps://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Wovr2kqb7qwhztwu. While these are interesting questions, personally I don't think they should block us from moving forward. I mean, these best practices exist whether or not all existing code conforms to them, whether or not they are documented, and whether or not we call the documentation a "draft". This is just about having them documented. It's not like we plan to rename the page to "Requirements for extensions". Still it might be worth adding a sentence like "this is only for extensions listed on mediawiki.org". Best Thiemo _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list --wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email towikitech-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikitech-l.lists.wikimedia.org/

Hi Ostrzyciel. Replies inline. On Thu, 27 Jan 2022, at 08:15, Ostrzyciel wrote: These guidelines, and indeed most coding conventions and development guidelines, are directed at MediaWiki developers in general. They are not merely for WMF-maintained extensions or WMF staff. Of the 70+ bullet points in the current draft, there are exactly 2 points specific to WMF, and these are explicitly called out as such to avoid confusion (those are about sec/perf review, and stewardship). The best practices document aims to reflect status quo among MediaWiki developers, which includes maintainers of the many MediaWiki hosted in Gerrit that aren't WMF-deployed. It is my understanding that by and large extensions follow the same coding styles, conventions, and guidelines. I also find in practice that volunteers contribute as much (if not, more than) staff to the shaping and implementation of these guidelines. Although these volunteers do tend to contribute more to WMF-deployed extensions, they are not currently staff. No. I specifically addressed the email to all/everyone, and all MW developers are welcome to participate. Extension maintainers often do follow these conventions. But, they are by no means required to. It's not a requirement for hosting (unlike e.g. licensing and code of conduct), and there are certainly numerous extensions that follow a different coding style, or don't follow any (publicly known) guidelines. There is one line in the TLDR of my email where I called upon tech leads among WMDE/WMF staff. I recognise this may have set a confusing tone. -- Timo _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list --wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe send an email towikitech-l-leave(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/wikitech-l.lists.wikimedia.org/