Hi everyone,
During the 1.19 cycle, there were some namespace names that were changed and then reverted shortly before deployment. We're about to deploy 1.20wmf1 to a lot of international wikis on Wednesday of next week, and I'm a little worried that we may need to do a speedy revert again.
Two concerns: 1. Do the new namespace names have community consensus? What I've heard though the grapevine is that yes, there has been an effort to get consensus, but confirmation of that would be nice. 2. For each namespace that was changed, was there a corresponding alias set up? Rumor has it that there might be a few cases where that isn't the case.
I did a quick grep for recent changes to NS_* messages in hopes of finding a few examples of recent changes. Below is a list of changes in 2012 to NS_ messages.
We should get this sorted out before we push on Wednesday.
Thanks Rob
23ea50c3 (Antoine Musso 2012-02-15 15:29:22 +0000 47) NS_USER => array( 'male' => 'Përdoruesi', 'female' => 'Përdoruesja' ), 23ea50c3 (Antoine Musso 2012-02-15 15:29:22 +0000 48) NS_USER_TALK => array( 'male' => 'Përdoruesi_diskutim', 'female' => 'Përdoruesja_diskutim' ), dde3821a (Niklas Laxström 2012-03-28 13:41:19 +0000 56) NS_USER => array( 'male' => 'Suradnik', 'female' => 'Suradnica' ), dde3821a (Niklas Laxström 2012-03-28 13:41:19 +0000 57) NS_USER_TALK => array( 'male' => 'Razgovor_sa_suradnikom', 'female' => 'Razgovor_sa_suradnicom' ), b3664209 (Translation updater bot 2012-04-06 15:34:29 +0000 26) NS_MEDIA => 'Медиум', b3664209 (Translation updater bot 2012-04-06 15:34:29 +0000 45) 'Медија' => NS_MEDIA, b3664209 (Translation updater bot 2012-04-06 15:34:29 +0000 46) 'Специјални' => NS_SPECIAL, b3664209 (Translation updater bot 2012-04-06 15:34:29 +0000 47) 'Слика' => NS_FILE, 80f29d01 ( Reedy 2012-04-07 21:03:44 +0100 47) 'Imagem' => NS_FILE, 3bc64a9f (Translation updater bot 2012-04-03 21:11:13 +0000 440)'articlepage' => "'Content page' is used for NS_MAIN and any other non-standard namespace and this message is only used in skins Nostalgia, Cologneblue and Standard in the bottomLinks part. 659f18cc (Tim Starling 2012-01-02 22:54:57 +0000 108) NS_USER => array( 'male' => 'Участник', 'female' => 'Участница' ), 659f18cc (Tim Starling 2012-01-02 22:54:57 +0000 109) NS_USER_TALK => array( 'male' => 'Обсуждение_участника', 'female' => 'Обсуждение_участницы' ), 764b3492 (Niklas Laxström 2012-02-13 19:36:49 +0000 61) NS_USER => array( 'male' => 'Përdoruesi', 'female' => 'Përdoruesja' ), 764b3492 (Niklas Laxström 2012-02-13 19:36:49 +0000 62) NS_USER_TALK => array( 'male' => 'Përdoruesi_diskutim', 'female' => 'Përdoruesja_diskutim' ), f0ecaf0a (Niklas Laxström 2012-04-10 16:36:41 +0000 38) NS_FILE => 'Датотека', f0ecaf0a (Niklas Laxström 2012-04-10 16:36:41 +0000 39) NS_FILE_TALK => 'Разговор_о_датотеци', f0ecaf0a (Niklas Laxström 2012-04-10 16:36:41 +0000 40) NS_MEDIAWIKI => 'Медијавики', f0ecaf0a (Niklas Laxström 2012-04-10 16:36:41 +0000 41) NS_MEDIAWIKI_TALK => 'Разговор_о_Медијавикију',
On 13 April 2012 04:52, Rob Lanphier robla@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone,
During the 1.19 cycle, there were some namespace names that were changed and then reverted shortly before deployment. We're about to deploy 1.20wmf1 to a lot of international wikis on Wednesday of next week, and I'm a little worried that we may need to do a speedy revert again.
I'm worried about lots of stuff, this thing is near the bottom of that list.
Two concerns:
- Do the new namespace names have community consensus? What I've heard
though the grapevine is that yes, there has been an effort to get consensus, but confirmation of that would be nice.
Since when is consensus required for software or localisation changes?
However, long time ago I talked with Tim who reverted the original change. I also proposed a solution (post notifications to all affected Wikipedias) [1] but got no comments on that. I decided to execute the plan anyway [2] and we got positive feedback, negative feedback and no feedback at all for some languages. For the negative feedback I did some reverts [3,4].
There is always guaranteed to be someone who doesn't like the changes. However, after our request for feedback I am pretty sure that we have avoided the most unwanted changes. I'm assuming good faith for the rest of the namespace changes.
- For each namespace that was changed, was there a corresponding alias
set up? Rumor has it that there might be a few cases where that isn't the case.
Here are some facts instead: * Only reported issue I am aware of is at [1], which doesn't look problematic to me * Tim who originally reverted the commit approved it again [2] * I and Siebrand have double checked the commit
We should get this sorted out before we push on Wednesday.
As far as I am concerned everything is fine and ready for deployment
-Niklas
[1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/107309 [2] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/3318 [3] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/4390 [3] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/4648
În data de 13 aprilie 2012, 12:02, Niklas Laxström niklas.laxstrom@gmail.com a scris:
Since when is consensus required for software or localisation changes?
Niklas, are you having a bad day today or are you always so inconsiderate to the main users of the software you write? A namespace name change is a *huge* deal, and you do want some kind of consensus, or at least majority support for that change, otherwise you'll start a huge storm (again).
Strainu
Hi Niklas,
Thanks for the detailed response. I think you addressed a lot of my concerns.
Comments inline:
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 2:02 AM, Niklas Laxström niklas.laxstrom@gmail.comwrote:
Two concerns:
- Do the new namespace names have community consensus? What I've heard
though the grapevine is that yes, there has been an effort to get consensus, but confirmation of that would be nice.
Since when is consensus required for software or localisation changes?
As was pointed out by Strainu, namespace changes are a bigger deal than most. That said, I'm satisfied that the appropriate effort was based on the links you gave me, so thank you!
- For each namespace that was changed, was there a corresponding alias
set up? Rumor has it that there might be a few cases where that isn't
the
case.
Here are some facts instead:
- Only reported issue I am aware of is at [1], which doesn't look
problematic to me
- Tim who originally reverted the commit approved it again [2]
- I and Siebrand have double checked the commit
Perfect, thanks!
[1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/107309 [2] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/3318 [3] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/4390 [3] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/4648
^ These links were really helpful, thanks!
I'm checking in on this in an abundance of caution, since the last time around, there was disagreement about the level of diligence needed. Sorry if this feels like I'm jerking you around; I'm just double checking for known problems from last deployment.
Rob
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org