Hi,
I heard that there was a plan to merge these wikis to one central wiki for technical documentation for various projects on wikimedia, what is the current status of that? Are we going to merge it to labsconsole, or to wikitech? There are some services atm running on labs and documentation is all around, it would be really nice to have a one place for this all. Put all the documentations for software from meta, mediawiki, english wikipedia and labsconsole and wikitech to some central "tech" wiki.
I heard that there was a plan to merge these wikis to one central wiki for technical documentation for various projects on wikimedia, what is the current status of that? Are we going to merge it to labsconsole, or to wikitech? There are some services atm running on labs and documentation is all around, it would be really nice to have a one place for this all. Put all the documentations for software from meta, mediawiki, english wikipedia and labsconsole and wikitech to some central "tech" wiki.
Yes. There's a plan to do so. We'd merge wikitech into labsconsole, but we'll likely rename labsconsole to wikitech (and of course add a redirect, so that old links continue to work). We'll also have a wikitech-static mirror, which similar to wikitech now, will be offsite and can be used for reference if the cluster is down.
We need to identify which documentation should and should not be migrated over when it occurs, as there is a lot of documentation that is old/inaccurate and should be deleted. We'd love to have some community support for this, if anyone wants to help out.
- Ryan
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
I heard that there was a plan to merge these wikis to one central wiki for technical documentation for various projects on wikimedia, what is the current status of that? Are we going to merge it to labsconsole, or to wikitech? There are some services atm running on labs and documentation is all around, it would be really nice to have a one place for this all. Put all the documentations for software from meta, mediawiki, english wikipedia and labsconsole and wikitech to some central "tech" wiki.
Yes. There's a plan to do so. We'd merge wikitech into labsconsole, but we'll likely rename labsconsole to wikitech (and of course add a redirect, so that old links continue to work). We'll also have a wikitech-static mirror, which similar to wikitech now, will be offsite and can be used for reference if the cluster is down.
We need to identify which documentation should and should not be migrated over when it occurs, as there is a lot of documentation that is old/inaccurate and should be deleted. We'd love to have some community support for this, if anyone wants to help out.
If we enabled wikitech as an import source for labsconsole, this process could get underway. I'd suggest making some new category on wikitech "Stuff to be moved to Labsconsole" that pages can be put in once they've been vetted.
-Chad
I'd be happy to help, however wikitech is restricted wiki, so I guess I can't really help there, anyway I think it would be best if current wikitech was kept for historical purposes, and in case we forgot to move something you could find it in, wikitech-historical.wikimedia.org or similar url
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
I heard that there was a plan to merge these wikis to one central wiki for technical documentation for various projects on wikimedia, what is the current status of that? Are we going to merge it to labsconsole, or to wikitech? There are some services atm running on labs and documentation is all around, it would be really nice to have a one place for this all. Put all the documentations for software from meta, mediawiki, english wikipedia and labsconsole and wikitech to some central "tech" wiki.
Yes. There's a plan to do so. We'd merge wikitech into labsconsole, but we'll likely rename labsconsole to wikitech (and of course add a redirect, so that old links continue to work). We'll also have a wikitech-static mirror, which similar to wikitech now, will be offsite and can be used for reference if the cluster is down.
We need to identify which documentation should and should not be migrated over when it occurs, as there is a lot of documentation that is old/inaccurate and should be deleted. We'd love to have some community support for this, if anyone wants to help out.
If we enabled wikitech as an import source for labsconsole, this process could get underway. I'd suggest making some new category on wikitech "Stuff to be moved to Labsconsole" that pages can be put in once they've been vetted.
-Chad
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Petr Bena benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
I'd be happy to help, however wikitech is restricted wiki, so I guess I can't really help there, anyway I think it would be best if current wikitech was kept for historical purposes, and in case we forgot to move something you could find it in, wikitech-historical.wikimedia.org or similar url
Well, it doesn't allow self-registration to combat spam. We can create accounts as necessary.
- Ryan
Ok, if there is any stuff that can be done on wikitech like categorization of pages etc I could help with that, but otherwise I have no idea how I could be useful on that wiki, I have barely any knowledge of production. What exactly did you mean by community support
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:11 PM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:06 PM, Petr Bena benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
I'd be happy to help, however wikitech is restricted wiki, so I guess I can't really help there, anyway I think it would be best if current wikitech was kept for historical purposes, and in case we forgot to move something you could find it in, wikitech-historical.wikimedia.org or similar url
Well, it doesn't allow self-registration to combat spam. We can create accounts as necessary.
- Ryan
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:15 PM, Petr Bena benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
Ok, if there is any stuff that can be done on wikitech like categorization of pages etc I could help with that, but otherwise I have no idea how I could be useful on that wiki, I have barely any knowledge of production. What exactly did you mean by community support
Tagging of the content, importing, etc.
- Ryan
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
We need to identify which documentation should and should not be migrated over when it occurs, as there is a lot of documentation that is old/inaccurate and should be deleted. We'd love to have some community support for this, if anyone wants to help out.
If we enabled wikitech as an import source for labsconsole, this process could get underway. I'd suggest making some new category on wikitech "Stuff to be moved to Labsconsole" that pages can be put in once they've been vetted.
Rob Moen has been working on a simple JS tool that facilitates the tagging process. Basically, instead of manually tagging the pages with a different template for each action (archive, delete, keep), there's a simple box that shows up at the top of the page, and you can tag the page with a few clicks.
The goal of this tool is to allow people with expertise and/or authority to quickly tag the content. Once the content has been tagged, other people can deal with the actual move.
So far the possible actions are: * archive * delete * keep and (optionally) expand and/or update The actions use radio buttons, and the options checkboxes. This list is just a start; if you see other or better qualifiers, we can change them.
Do you think this would be useful, or do you prefer to stick to manual templating/categorizing?
Also, the gadgets extension isn't currently installed on wikitech.wm.o. I'm not sure it's worth going through the trouble of installing it (would it even be compatible with the 1.17 MediaWiki that's running it?). Perhaps it would be simpler to just add the code snippet to [[MediaWiki:Vector.js]] for the duration of the cleanup?
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 8:31 AM, Guillaume Paumier gpaumier@wikimedia.org wrote:
Rob Moen has been working on a simple JS tool that facilitates the tagging process. Basically, instead of manually tagging the pages with a different template for each action (archive, delete, keep), there's a simple box that shows up at the top of the page, and you can tag the page with a few clicks.
The goal of this tool is to allow people with expertise and/or authority to quickly tag the content. Once the content has been tagged, other people can deal with the actual move.
So far the possible actions are:
- archive
- delete
- keep and (optionally) expand and/or update
The actions use radio buttons, and the options checkboxes. This list is just a start; if you see other or better qualifiers, we can change them.
Do you think this would be useful, or do you prefer to stick to manual templating/categorizing?
Awesome :) Probably also worth adding a quick box to suggest a rename of the page when it's imported. I think doing it this way is kind of neat, especially if there's an easy way to see all the content that's not been tagged yet.
Also, the gadgets extension isn't currently installed on wikitech.wm.o. I'm not sure it's worth going through the trouble of installing it (would it even be compatible with the 1.17 MediaWiki that's running it?). Perhaps it would be simpler to just add the code snippet to [[MediaWiki:Vector.js]] for the duration of the cleanup?
Wikitech should probably be upgraded to something newer :p Probably not worth adding Gadgets.
-Chad
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 2:38 PM, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
Awesome :) Probably also worth adding a quick box to suggest a rename of the page when it's imported.
Added.
I think doing it this way is kind of neat, especially if there's an easy way to see all the content that's not been tagged yet.
I've been thinking about this, and I can't think of a way to have an automated list that would basically be the difference between Special:Allpages and Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Foo
Unless someone comes up with a better solution (or wants to quickly set up a bot to maintain the list, which seems overkill), having a list of all pages, going through them alphabetically, and <s>-ing or removing the pages done might be the simplest solution.
If someone wants to take a look, the script is currently at: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Robmoen/fixmeGadget.js
I've tested it on mw.o and it seems to work great, except for an annoying bug (if someone with JS knowledge wants to fix it): https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User_talk:Robmoen/fixmeGadget.js
I haven't yet been able to make it work on wikitech.wm.o (are userscripts enabled there?)
If this makes sense, I can create the evaluation template and we can get going.
There's been some conversation about this in the past (not sure which mailing list). Yes, we should definitly centralize documentation about these into one wiki:
* Documentation of production cluster (e.g. 'fenari', 'srv###', 'db###', upload/scalers, squids etc. ) * Wikimedia engineering projects (status updates, team members etc.) * Workflow for operations (how to deploy, how to use puppet, ...) * ..
There are split over labsconsole, wikitech, metawiki and mediawikiwiki.
I'm not sure if it makes sense to have the Labs/OpenStack/Nova management interface on this same "new wikitech" wiki though. This means that all the community projects running inside labs will/might use this same wiki to document their internal structure - which can (and should be) a lot of projects that are not Wikimedia engineering projects.
Documentation for labs as being a Wikimedia project makes sense, but the actual projects inside and management maybe don't fit well inside the new wikitech. I like that of the labsconsole.
Also, a general note: Beware that you doesn't confuse "beta" with "Wikimedia Labs". "beta" is one of many projects hosted inside the Labs environment. The "beta" project is a virtual clone of the production cluster. Any documentation regarding beta will become obsolete as soon as it has completed in reproducing the production cluster (in which case the wikitech docs are all that is relevant, and any minor details specific to the application of it within beta fit on a small page[1] in labsconsole).
-- Krinkle
[1] simpel pages such as https://labsconsole.wikimedia.org/wiki/Deployment/Help although probably under a different name.
On 7 June 2012 00:08, Krinkle krinklemail@gmail.com wrote:
Also, a general note: Beware that you doesn't confuse "beta" with "Wikimedia Labs". "beta" is one of many projects hosted inside the Labs environment. The "beta" project is a virtual clone of the production cluster. Any documentation regarding beta will become obsolete as soon as it has completed in reproducing the production cluster (in which case the wikitech docs are all that is relevant, and any minor details specific to the application of it within beta fit on a small page[1] in labsconsole).
And to confuse you even more, the "beta" project is actually called "deployment-prep" on Labs Console - https://labsconsole.wikimedia.org/wiki/Nova_Resource:Deployment-prep. But hey, who said this was easy? ;-)
I'm not sure if it makes sense to have the Labs/OpenStack/Nova management interface on this same "new wikitech" wiki though. This means that all the community projects running inside labs will/might use this same wiki to document their internal structure - which can (and should be) a lot of projects that are not Wikimedia engineering projects.
Documentation for labs as being a Wikimedia project makes sense, but the actual projects inside and management maybe don't fit well inside the new wikitech. I like that of the labsconsole.
Do you mean they aren't *staff* engineering projects? Labs is meant to be a stepping stone. For most projects, the idea is that people will implement something in Labs and it'll get moved into production. The documentation for that project will then be the documentation for Labs and production.
One of the biggest reasons I wanted to merge the wikis is because I feel that volunteer operations engineers should be documenting their infrastructure changes in the same place as staff operations engineers.
- Ryan
On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Ryan Lane wrote:
I'm not sure if it makes sense to have the Labs/OpenStack/Nova management interface on this same "new wikitech" wiki though. This means that all the community projects running inside labs will/might use this same wiki to document their internal structure - which can (and should be) a lot of projects that are not Wikimedia engineering projects.
Documentation for labs as being a Wikimedia project makes sense, but the actual projects inside and management maybe don't fit well inside the new wikitech. I like that of the labsconsole.
Do you mean they aren't *staff* engineering projects? Labs is meant to be a stepping stone. For most projects, the idea is that people will implement something in Labs and it'll get moved into production. The documentation for that project will then be the documentation for Labs and production.
One of the biggest reasons I wanted to merge the wikis is because I feel that volunteer operations engineers should be documenting their infrastructure changes in the same place as staff operations engineers.
- Ryan
No, that's not what I meant.
Contributions (from whomever) to for example the production cluster puppets (through gerrit), that may have an RFC on wikitechwiki ahead of time sounds awesome. Stuff can be proposed by whomever, and then implemented by whomever. Then tested in labs and merged/pushed to production.
I was refering to projects that will not be foundation engineering projects, or at least do not intend to be that.
*cut 2 paragraphs*
...when trying to come up with examples, it turns out that those examples (Tool-Labs: early extension development, bot hosting, slow-query tools, ..) probably wouldn't put their documentation on either wikitech or labsconsole, so nevermind.
-- Krinkle
I don't understand why? Wikitech is a perfect place for bots documentation as well, especially when it comes to large bots operated by many people, these needs to have documentation so that they can be overtaken by someone else in case the original person who launched bot, doesn't have a time to maintain it.
Why should it be for foundation only projects?
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Krinkle krinklemail@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Ryan Lane wrote:
I'm not sure if it makes sense to have the Labs/OpenStack/Nova management interface on this same "new wikitech" wiki though. This means that all the community projects running inside labs will/might use this same wiki to document their internal structure - which can (and should be) a lot of projects that are not Wikimedia engineering projects.
Documentation for labs as being a Wikimedia project makes sense, but the actual projects inside and management maybe don't fit well inside the new wikitech. I like that of the labsconsole.
Do you mean they aren't *staff* engineering projects? Labs is meant to be a stepping stone. For most projects, the idea is that people will implement something in Labs and it'll get moved into production. The documentation for that project will then be the documentation for Labs and production.
One of the biggest reasons I wanted to merge the wikis is because I feel that volunteer operations engineers should be documenting their infrastructure changes in the same place as staff operations engineers.
- Ryan
No, that's not what I meant.
Contributions (from whomever) to for example the production cluster puppets (through gerrit), that may have an RFC on wikitechwiki ahead of time sounds awesome. Stuff can be proposed by whomever, and then implemented by whomever. Then tested in labs and merged/pushed to production.
I was refering to projects that will not be foundation engineering projects, or at least do not intend to be that.
*cut 2 paragraphs*
...when trying to come up with examples, it turns out that those examples (Tool-Labs: early extension development, bot hosting, slow-query tools, ..) probably wouldn't put their documentation on either wikitech or labsconsole, so nevermind.
-- Krinkle
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
There is a difference between wikimedia projects which are somehow related to wikimedia projects, and foundation projects which are funded by foundation. But this difference is only about people and money, so why should we have a different wiki for that
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Petr Bena benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand why? Wikitech is a perfect place for bots documentation as well, especially when it comes to large bots operated by many people, these needs to have documentation so that they can be overtaken by someone else in case the original person who launched bot, doesn't have a time to maintain it.
Why should it be for foundation only projects?
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Krinkle krinklemail@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Ryan Lane wrote:
I'm not sure if it makes sense to have the Labs/OpenStack/Nova management interface on this same "new wikitech" wiki though. This means that all the community projects running inside labs will/might use this same wiki to document their internal structure - which can (and should be) a lot of projects that are not Wikimedia engineering projects.
Documentation for labs as being a Wikimedia project makes sense, but the actual projects inside and management maybe don't fit well inside the new wikitech. I like that of the labsconsole.
Do you mean they aren't *staff* engineering projects? Labs is meant to be a stepping stone. For most projects, the idea is that people will implement something in Labs and it'll get moved into production. The documentation for that project will then be the documentation for Labs and production.
One of the biggest reasons I wanted to merge the wikis is because I feel that volunteer operations engineers should be documenting their infrastructure changes in the same place as staff operations engineers.
- Ryan
No, that's not what I meant.
Contributions (from whomever) to for example the production cluster puppets (through gerrit), that may have an RFC on wikitechwiki ahead of time sounds awesome. Stuff can be proposed by whomever, and then implemented by whomever. Then tested in labs and merged/pushed to production.
I was refering to projects that will not be foundation engineering projects, or at least do not intend to be that.
*cut 2 paragraphs*
...when trying to come up with examples, it turns out that those examples (Tool-Labs: early extension development, bot hosting, slow-query tools, ..) probably wouldn't put their documentation on either wikitech or labsconsole, so nevermind.
-- Krinkle
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I wanted to say "volunteer projects" which are affiliated with various wikimedia projects
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:20 PM, Petr Bena benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
There is a difference between wikimedia projects which are somehow related to wikimedia projects, and foundation projects which are funded by foundation. But this difference is only about people and money, so why should we have a different wiki for that
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Petr Bena benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand why? Wikitech is a perfect place for bots documentation as well, especially when it comes to large bots operated by many people, these needs to have documentation so that they can be overtaken by someone else in case the original person who launched bot, doesn't have a time to maintain it.
Why should it be for foundation only projects?
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Krinkle krinklemail@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Ryan Lane wrote:
I'm not sure if it makes sense to have the Labs/OpenStack/Nova management interface on this same "new wikitech" wiki though. This means that all the community projects running inside labs will/might use this same wiki to document their internal structure - which can (and should be) a lot of projects that are not Wikimedia engineering projects.
Documentation for labs as being a Wikimedia project makes sense, but the actual projects inside and management maybe don't fit well inside the new wikitech. I like that of the labsconsole.
Do you mean they aren't *staff* engineering projects? Labs is meant to be a stepping stone. For most projects, the idea is that people will implement something in Labs and it'll get moved into production. The documentation for that project will then be the documentation for Labs and production.
One of the biggest reasons I wanted to merge the wikis is because I feel that volunteer operations engineers should be documenting their infrastructure changes in the same place as staff operations engineers.
- Ryan
No, that's not what I meant.
Contributions (from whomever) to for example the production cluster puppets (through gerrit), that may have an RFC on wikitechwiki ahead of time sounds awesome. Stuff can be proposed by whomever, and then implemented by whomever. Then tested in labs and merged/pushed to production.
I was refering to projects that will not be foundation engineering projects, or at least do not intend to be that.
*cut 2 paragraphs*
...when trying to come up with examples, it turns out that those examples (Tool-Labs: early extension development, bot hosting, slow-query tools, ..) probably wouldn't put their documentation on either wikitech or labsconsole, so nevermind.
-- Krinkle
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I agree with Petr, I see no reason to put them on different wikis. Namespaces are cheap.
-Chad On Jun 7, 2012 11:20 AM, "Petr Bena" benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand why? Wikitech is a perfect place for bots documentation as well, especially when it comes to large bots operated by many people, these needs to have documentation so that they can be overtaken by someone else in case the original person who launched bot, doesn't have a time to maintain it.
Why should it be for foundation only projects?
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:08 PM, Krinkle krinklemail@gmail.com wrote:
On Jun 7, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Ryan Lane wrote:
I'm not sure if it makes sense to have the Labs/OpenStack/Nova
management
interface on this same "new wikitech" wiki though. This means that all
the
community projects running inside labs will/might use this same wiki
to document
their internal structure - which can (and should be) a lot of projects
that are
not Wikimedia engineering projects.
Documentation for labs as being a Wikimedia project makes sense, but
the actual
projects inside and management maybe don't fit well inside the new
wikitech. I
like that of the labsconsole.
Do you mean they aren't *staff* engineering projects? Labs is meant to be a stepping stone. For most projects, the idea is that people will implement something in Labs and it'll get moved into production. The documentation for that project will then be the documentation for Labs and production.
One of the biggest reasons I wanted to merge the wikis is because I feel that volunteer operations engineers should be documenting their infrastructure changes in the same place as staff operations engineers.
- Ryan
No, that's not what I meant.
Contributions (from whomever) to for example the production cluster
puppets (through gerrit), that may have an RFC on wikitechwiki ahead of time sounds awesome. Stuff can be proposed by whomever, and then implemented by whomever. Then tested in labs and merged/pushed to production.
I was refering to projects that will not be foundation engineering
projects, or at least do not intend to be that.
*cut 2 paragraphs*
...when trying to come up with examples, it turns out that those
examples (Tool-Labs: early extension development, bot hosting, slow-query tools, ..) probably wouldn't put their documentation on either wikitech or labsconsole, so nevermind.
-- Krinkle
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
Chad wrote:
I agree with Petr, I see no reason to put them on different wikis. Namespaces are cheap.
Namespaces are usually a pain in the ass. Sj's post on the subject: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wikimedia.org&diff=365735 6&oldid=3657294#Separating_the_wheat_from_the_chaff.
From his post: "... but that would address many of the reasons that people
fragment what are otherwise sensible critical-mass communities or projects into multiple beautiful-but-subcritical communities which fade over time."
MZMcBride
Namespaces are usually a pain in the ass. Sj's post on the subject: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wikimedia.org&diff=365735 6&oldid=3657294#Separating_the_wheat_from_the_chaff.
From his post: "... but that would address many of the reasons that people fragment what are otherwise sensible critical-mass communities or projects into multiple beautiful-but-subcritical communities which fade over time."
I don't think we need namespaces. I definitely don't think we need multiple wikis, though. The best part about a wiki is that if we figure out we did it wrong, we can change it.
- Ryan
Indeed, why we need to separate it? We should separate docs for applications, for server configuration and such, categories are fine to do that. But there is no need to separate wmf projects and community projects.
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 3:05 AM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
Namespaces are usually a pain in the ass. Sj's post on the subject: https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Wikimedia.org&diff=365735 6&oldid=3657294#Separating_the_wheat_from_the_chaff.
From his post: "... but that would address many of the reasons that people fragment what are otherwise sensible critical-mass communities or projects into multiple beautiful-but-subcritical communities which fade over time."
I don't think we need namespaces. I definitely don't think we need multiple wikis, though. The best part about a wiki is that if we figure out we did it wrong, we can change it.
- Ryan
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org