Hi.
Someone asked me about LiquidThreads and I pointed them to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/LiquidThreads_3.0 only to realize that the current timeline on that page reads "August 2011".
Is there an updated status for LiquidThreads? I vaguely recall some e-mail saying it wasn't going to be a priority in 2012, but I don't really remember. If someone knows and could update this list or that page, that'd be awesome.
MZMcBride
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:40 PM, MZMcBride z@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Someone asked me about LiquidThreads and I pointed them to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/LiquidThreads_3.0 only to realize that the current timeline on that page reads "August 2011".
Is there an updated status for LiquidThreads? I vaguely recall some e-mail saying it wasn't going to be a priority in 2012, but I don't really remember. If someone knows and could update this list or that page, that'd be awesome.
I know we *want* to prioritize it, with a basic plan that looks roughly like: * design a global notification system for it to hook into [1] * strip a lot of stuff down * build it back up but more awesome
[1] I've got some draft notes on low-level notification frameworks up at < https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Notification_framework%3... and Brandon's currently working on some UX designs. We had a nice chat with Wikia folks recently about their 'message wall' system which internally is similar to many parts of LQT, but has a nicer notification experience, and hope to steal some ideas from there (though we probably can't take implementation easily as a lot of their code is mixed up with other extensions).
As for dates and how many / which devs will be assigned to it I can't say, but it all ties in with just about every other "new editor retention" project. (For instance MoodBar's comments need a better way to get replies and notify the original poster about it.)
-- brion
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 2:23 PM, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
As for dates and how many / which devs will be assigned to it I can't say, but it all ties in with just about every other "new editor retention" project. (For instance MoodBar's comments need a better way to get replies and notify the original poster about it.)
Absolutely. We're currently wrapping up work on the feedback dashboard, which will then go into maintenance mode for a while. After that (probably ~mid-January) we'll tackle the new page creation / triage work that we've committed to do.
We had originally planned to handle identity (user profiles / surfacing basic reputational info) as the next big area of work. But my bias is to re-jiggle that and tackle messaging/notifications next, because as you say it factors into so many problems, including what we've done so far with the FB dashboard, as well as bottom-up efforts by the community to recruit and help new users.
This may mean building on the LQT codebase, but there are probably some quick wins in notification that we can get without going all the way.
"Next" though would likely still mean no sooner than March/April. Any help is as always appreciated.
Erik
On 3 January 2012 23:15, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
"Next" though would likely still mean no sooner than March/April. Any help is as always appreciated.
You say that help is always appreciated, and I think that, *in general*, it is; but with regard to specific projects, particularly where there's a lot of WMF staff involvement, I'm not entirely convinced. I've been explicitly *dis*couraged from taking a stab at projects because they were 'on the list' of staff todos (one, ironically, Andrew's project for *after* LQT... :-D ). Unless you give volunteer devs more detail about what they *can* productively do that won't be duplicated or wasted effort, I doubt anyone will be able to do very much useful towards this (or any other) project.
Perhaps this, as something that a *lot* of people from everywhere on the spectrum care about and would probably be enthusiastic to work towards, is a good opportunity to try a more structured approach towards parceling out work? Publicise clearly whatever specification is currently floating around the office (or take the time *now* to define it if it's not already); make it clear what work needs to be done, and especially what would make a good isolated module; and then come back in April and see if anything has materialised that you can use? If nothing useful has been done, you've wasted no time or effort, just rescheduled it a bit; if good work has been done then you've accelerated the project; and if work has been done but it doesn't fit with what the staff produce, then you know that the enthusiasm is there but that you need to work on your communication for the next project.
--HM
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org