Hoi,
I brought two arguments, you do not address either. The issue is introducing
GIT, there are production processes that will break. Not addressing this and
not proving that it can provide the goods is at issue. I suggest proving GIT
in an environment where our production will not get broken.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 22 March 2011 19:11, Ryan Lane <rlane32(a)gmail.com> wrote:
As to
Toolserver, this environment and its functionality is deeply
flawed.
As the tools are open source, there is no reason
why relevant tools
cannot
be brought into GIT and upgraded to a level where
they are of production
quality. Either GIT is able to cope or its distributed character adds no
real value.
The notion that it has to be MediaWiki core and or its extensions first
is
absurd when you consider that it is what we use
to run one of the biggest
websites of the world. We rely on the continued support for our
production
process. The daily process provided by
LocalisationUpdate is such a
production process. When the continuity of production processes is not a
prime priority, something is fundamentally wrong.
You are misunderstanding. The thread isn't about toolserver, so you
are muddying up a perfectly valid thread with something totally
non-related.
Yes, toolserver has a problem, and it should be addressed. It isn't a
problem with the MediaWiki developer community though, it's a problem
with the toolserver community, and they need to fix it. But again,
let's focus on one issue at a time.
- Ryan Lane
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l