Which extensions could use more active attention? Let me know so I can suggest this work to developers with interest & spare time. For example, if volunteers are writing good patches that await review, maybe we could encourage them to take over triaging bugs and maintain the extensions more actively.

This is especially worth investigating for extensions that WMF deploys. The more developers who learn an extension's codebase and take a hand in maintaining it, the more quickly we can respond to possible problems.

I looked at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Category:Extensions_used_on_Wikimedia [0] and ran a Bugzilla search for open bugs on those extensions with severity Normal or higher and priority Normal or higher.

http://ur1.ca/85xoz

Numbers below are from a couple weeks ago when I was drafting this mail, but wouldn't be that different right now. Patches awaiting review:

ParserFunctions: 8 Math (texvc): 5 Cite: 5 AntiSpoof: 4 CentralAuth: 4 ConfirmEdit: 3 DismissableSiteNotice: 3 DumpHTML: 3 ProofreadPage: 3 CheckUser: 2 DynamicPageList2: 2 Lucene Search: 2 MobileFrontend: 2 SyntaxHighlight (GeSHi): 2 WikiEditor: 2 CategoryTree: 1 CharInsert: 1 EasyTimeline: 1 ImageMap: 1 Nuke: 1 OggHandler: 1 Poem: 1 ReaderFeedback: 1 UploadWizard: 1 Vector: 1

As of today there are 137 patches awaiting review for MediaWiki, and 60 patches awaiting review for extensions that WMF deploys.

[0] If someone else wants to figure out & align the various lists of extensions deployed on WMF servers, the sources to use are https://translatewiki.net/wiki/Main_Wikimedia_extensions , http://svn.wikimedia.org/viewvc/mediawiki/trunk/translatewiki/MediaWiki/Wiki... and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Category:Extensions_used_on_Wikimedia .