Hi,
In the past it happened to me a few times that I opened bugs about something wrong that happened on a Wikimedia site, and it was closed as invalid because the issue was not in MediaWiki code, but in a local gadget, style or template on that project.
The bugs were actually fixed, but I'd like to question the "invalid" closure.
They were real bugs in real products. The fact that the software is not in Gerrit doesn't mean that they don't affect the product de facto. Just for the sake of example, if a bug in a local Gadget affects the Flow extension, for example, I find it perfectly valid to add tag the Flow tag to it. Core and extension developers should be curious about how what they developed behaves in the wild.
I do wonder what other tags are there to add to such a bug? I'm going to open one now.
(P.S. Yes, this raises an issue of whether non-Wikimedia sites should count. I say - yes, and it shouldn't be limited unless it gets seriously out of hand. But a URL with reproduction instructions must always be provided.)
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes. We're tracking all sorts of nontechnical stuff in Phab too these days, there is no reason at all we should close out legit technical issues with site JS, CSS, Gadgets, templates, etc without actually doing something to help.
-- brion On Jul 15, 2015 11:28 PM, "Amir E. Aharoni" amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
Hi,
In the past it happened to me a few times that I opened bugs about something wrong that happened on a Wikimedia site, and it was closed as invalid because the issue was not in MediaWiki code, but in a local gadget, style or template on that project.
The bugs were actually fixed, but I'd like to question the "invalid" closure.
They were real bugs in real products. The fact that the software is not in Gerrit doesn't mean that they don't affect the product de facto. Just for the sake of example, if a bug in a local Gadget affects the Flow extension, for example, I find it perfectly valid to add tag the Flow tag to it. Core and extension developers should be curious about how what they developed behaves in the wild.
I do wonder what other tags are there to add to such a bug? I'm going to open one now.
(P.S. Yes, this raises an issue of whether non-Wikimedia sites should count. I say - yes, and it shouldn't be limited unless it gets seriously out of hand. But a URL with reproduction instructions must always be provided.)
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Perhaps a solution is to tag as something other than "invalid"; perhaps "downstream dependency"?
Pine On Jul 15, 2015 9:28 PM, "Amir E. Aharoni" amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
Hi,
In the past it happened to me a few times that I opened bugs about something wrong that happened on a Wikimedia site, and it was closed as invalid because the issue was not in MediaWiki code, but in a local gadget, style or template on that project.
The bugs were actually fixed, but I'd like to question the "invalid" closure.
They were real bugs in real products. The fact that the software is not in Gerrit doesn't mean that they don't affect the product de facto. Just for the sake of example, if a bug in a local Gadget affects the Flow extension, for example, I find it perfectly valid to add tag the Flow tag to it. Core and extension developers should be curious about how what they developed behaves in the wild.
I do wonder what other tags are there to add to such a bug? I'm going to open one now.
(P.S. Yes, this raises an issue of whether non-Wikimedia sites should count. I say - yes, and it shouldn't be limited unless it gets seriously out of hand. But a URL with reproduction instructions must always be provided.)
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I'm encountering a similar problem now - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T99361
On phabricator should there be a gadgets project? Community project?
I hit this issue all the time and to me is the biggest flaw with the fact editors can introduce code. Templates/gadgets for me are hard to debug, as it's hard for me to first locate the code, to understand it (since it's not hosted in the same way as our other code and is typically written very differently) and then to identify who owns it and who I can discuss fixing with.
This would be a great problem for the new community dev team to think about imo.
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
Hi,
In the past it happened to me a few times that I opened bugs about something wrong that happened on a Wikimedia site, and it was closed as invalid because the issue was not in MediaWiki code, but in a local gadget, style or template on that project.
The bugs were actually fixed, but I'd like to question the "invalid" closure.
They were real bugs in real products. The fact that the software is not in Gerrit doesn't mean that they don't affect the product de facto. Just for the sake of example, if a bug in a local Gadget affects the Flow extension, for example, I find it perfectly valid to add tag the Flow tag to it. Core and extension developers should be curious about how what they developed behaves in the wild.
I do wonder what other tags are there to add to such a bug? I'm going to open one now.
(P.S. Yes, this raises an issue of whether non-Wikimedia sites should count. I say - yes, and it shouldn't be limited unless it gets seriously out of hand. But a URL with reproduction instructions must always be provided.)
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Perhaps Engineering Community as well? Unlike Community Tech, CE has a manager and therefore perhaps more ability to address this sooner. Any comments, Quim?
Thanks! Pine On Jul 15, 2015 10:16 PM, "Jon Robson" jdlrobson@gmail.com wrote:
I'm encountering a similar problem now - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T99361
On phabricator should there be a gadgets project? Community project?
I hit this issue all the time and to me is the biggest flaw with the fact editors can introduce code. Templates/gadgets for me are hard to debug, as it's hard for me to first locate the code, to understand it (since it's not hosted in the same way as our other code and is typically written very differently) and then to identify who owns it and who I can discuss fixing with.
This would be a great problem for the new community dev team to think about imo.
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
Hi,
In the past it happened to me a few times that I opened bugs about something wrong that happened on a Wikimedia site, and it was closed as invalid because the issue was not in MediaWiki code, but in a local
gadget,
style or template on that project.
The bugs were actually fixed, but I'd like to question the "invalid" closure.
They were real bugs in real products. The fact that the software is not
in
Gerrit doesn't mean that they don't affect the product de facto. Just for the sake of example, if a bug in a local Gadget affects the Flow
extension,
for example, I find it perfectly valid to add tag the Flow tag to it.
Core
and extension developers should be curious about how what they developed behaves in the wild.
I do wonder what other tags are there to add to such a bug? I'm going to open one now.
(P.S. Yes, this raises an issue of whether non-Wikimedia sites should count. I say - yes, and it shouldn't be limited unless it gets seriously out of hand. But a URL with reproduction instructions must always be provided.)
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
-- Jon Robson
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
A single gadgets project that just tracks an issue with any MediaWiki gadget out there is just going to create a completely useless mess. I think that to track an issue with a gadget in Phabricator, there should be at least one associated project for the specific gadget (i.e., not just a tag or community-wishlist type thing), and these gadget projects should need to be created at the request of/with the knowledge of the actual gadget maintainer (otherwise it's going to be pretty pointless).
On 16 July 2015 at 00:21, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Perhaps Engineering Community as well? Unlike Community Tech, CE has a manager and therefore perhaps more ability to address this sooner. Any comments, Quim?
Thanks! Pine On Jul 15, 2015 10:16 PM, "Jon Robson" jdlrobson@gmail.com wrote:
I'm encountering a similar problem now - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T99361
On phabricator should there be a gadgets project? Community project?
I hit this issue all the time and to me is the biggest flaw with the fact editors can introduce code. Templates/gadgets for me are hard to debug, as it's hard for me to first locate the code, to understand it (since it's not hosted in the same way as our other code and is typically written very differently) and then to identify who owns it and who I can discuss fixing with.
This would be a great problem for the new community dev team to think about imo.
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 12:27 PM, Amir E. Aharoni amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il wrote:
Hi,
In the past it happened to me a few times that I opened bugs about something wrong that happened on a Wikimedia site, and it was closed as invalid because the issue was not in MediaWiki code, but in a local
gadget,
style or template on that project.
The bugs were actually fixed, but I'd like to question the "invalid" closure.
They were real bugs in real products. The fact that the software is not
in
Gerrit doesn't mean that they don't affect the product de facto. Just
for
the sake of example, if a bug in a local Gadget affects the Flow
extension,
for example, I find it perfectly valid to add tag the Flow tag to it.
Core
and extension developers should be curious about how what they
developed
behaves in the wild.
I do wonder what other tags are there to add to such a bug? I'm going
to
open one now.
(P.S. Yes, this raises an issue of whether non-Wikimedia sites should count. I say - yes, and it shouldn't be limited unless it gets
seriously
out of hand. But a URL with reproduction instructions must always be provided.)
-- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
-- Jon Robson
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 01:00 -0500, Alex Monk wrote:
A single gadgets project that just tracks an issue with any MediaWiki gadget out there is just going to create a completely useless mess.
+1.
On Jul 15, 2015 10:16 PM, "Jon Robson" jdlrobson@gmail.com wrote:
On phabricator should there be a gadgets project? Community project?
Any input for a potential general concept is welcome on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T85433 . Examples for obstacles / questions to answer can also be found in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T102657
Note that we have an example for a Gadgets project in Phabricator at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/1278/ because the discussion in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T100512 was convincing.
Cheers, andre
On Thu, 2015-07-16 at 07:27 +0300, Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
In the past it happened to me a few times that I opened bugs about something wrong that happened on a Wikimedia site, and it was closed as invalid because the issue was not in MediaWiki code, but in a local gadget, style or template on that project.
The bugs were actually fixed, but I'd like to question the "invalid" closure.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Bug_management/Bug_report_life_cycle cur rently says "A report is given the Invalid status when the problem is not a bug, or when it is a change that is outside the power of the component's developers."
When closing a task as invalid the person closing the task should add an explanation. In this case: "User scripts, gadgets and templates are local features and managed on wiki. Phabricator/Maniphest is used for MediaWiki, MediaWiki extensions, or server configuration. You could contact the author of the script/gadget or ask for help on the local Technical Village Pump. Closing as INVALID here in Phabricator as this is a matter to discuss and fix on the local wiki and currently not handled in Phabricator/Maniphest."
See https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T85433 for using Phabricator for gadget-related tasks (and discussing that idea).
Cheers, andre
It's very simple: this is what #Wikimedia-General-or-Unknown has always been used for. Just makes sure there is a way for relevant/interested people to eventually find (and understand) the report.
Relevant quip: domas: "who are you, and on what did you base your opinion? in the end, everything is a user issue, we shouldn't do anything." http://bugs.wmflabs.org/quips.cgi?action=show
Nemo
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org