awaiting you comments :)
Sure. Who are you? Do you have CVS access? Why are you doing a unilateral re-write? Why aren't the rest of the developers invited? Why should your unilateral re-write become THE mediawiki? Where's the design docs, and where's the code? Why are you using the obsolete "phase N" naming convention rather than the current MediaWiki 1.x (or 2.x) versioning scheme?
~ESP
* Evan Prodromou evan@wikitravel.org wrote:
awaiting you comments :)
Sure. Who are you? Do you have CVS access?
no.
<snip>
Why are you doing a unilateral re-write?
There are some things I really require.
Why aren't the rest of the developers invited?
This *was* an invite.
<snip>
Why should your unilateral re-write become THE mediawiki?
It shouldn't. I just want some improvements and I'm going to implement them. If this someday becomes "THE mediawiki" is really irrelevant for me. The only point that matters is that I'm going to implement my wishes and it would be nice if others also enjoy them and perhaps some could help a little bit.
I never had the intention to replace the existing wiki and will never have. If people enjoy my work they may use it, if not then they should stay on current wiki.
cu
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
Why should your unilateral re-write become THE mediawiki?
It shouldn't. I just want some improvements and I'm going to implement them. If this someday becomes "THE mediawiki" is really irrelevant for me. The only point that matters is that I'm going to implement my wishes and it would be nice if others also enjoy them and perhaps some could help a little bit.
I never had the intention to replace the existing wiki and will never have. If people enjoy my work they may use it, if not then they should stay on current wiki.
In that case can you take the feature discussions to another location? According to the list info page, wikitech-l is for discussing the technical organisation of the Wikipedias, not for organising the development of every single fork.
-- Tim Starling
I never had the intention to replace the existing wiki and will never have. If people enjoy my work they may use it, if not then they should stay on current wiki.
In that case can you take the feature discussions to another location? According to the list info page, wikitech-l is for discussing the technical organisation of the Wikipedias, not for organising the development of every single fork.
More specifically, perhaps this thread would have created less confusion and negative reactions all round if it had been posted to the mediawiki-l list as an announcement of a new project, forking from the MediaWiki codebase (and discussing, among other things, where this project will be organised). I must admit, I found the distinction between those two lists to be somewhat subtle at first, but Tim's right, this doesn't, technically, belong here...
* Evan Prodromou evan@wikitravel.org wrote:
forgotton to anwser:
<snip>
Why are you using the obsolete "phase N" naming convention rather than the current MediaWiki 1.x (or 2.x) versioning scheme?
Because due the major changes it probably won't be an clear descendant in the way that the newer version is completely (backwards) compatible with the current on.
I'll never release some higher version of some software which is not backwards compatible. In that case it is another branch, so another package.
cu
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org