The setup of test2.wikipedia.org is no longer meaningfully different from test.wikipedia.org. Is there a good reason for keeping test2?
On 27 January 2016 at 13:57, Ori Livneh ori@wikimedia.org wrote:
The setup of test2.wikipedia.org is no longer meaningfully different from test.wikipedia.org. Is there a good reason for keeping test2?
I'd be happy for it to be closed.
J.
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:00 PM James Forrester jforrester@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 27 January 2016 at 13:57, Ori Livneh ori@wikimedia.org wrote:
The setup of test2.wikipedia.org is no longer meaningfully different
from
test.wikipedia.org. Is there a good reason for keeping test2?
I'd be happy for it to be closed.
It was only setup ever so we could write/test het deploy.
It became way less useful after we stopped serving test(1) from NFS.
Close it.
-Chad
+1 from me for closing it. Do people have important things there, or can it be 'deleted'?
On 27 January 2016 at 22:01, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:00 PM James Forrester jforrester@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 27 January 2016 at 13:57, Ori Livneh ori@wikimedia.org wrote:
The setup of test2.wikipedia.org is no longer meaningfully different
from
test.wikipedia.org. Is there a good reason for keeping test2?
I'd be happy for it to be closed.
It was only setup ever so we could write/test het deploy.
It became way less useful after we stopped serving test(1) from NFS.
Close it.
-Chad _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 27 January 2016 at 14:18, Alex Monk alex@wikimedia.org wrote:
+1 from me for closing it. Do people have important things there, or can it be 'deleted'?
We could just move all the content into testwiki and redirect the domain. ;-)
J.
3 things come to mind. Not so long ago an invitation was sent to wiki communities to use that specific server for VE single edit tab testing. I think that should be taken into account. Since this feature has not yet landed in production, people might still be using that link to evaluate and would be surprised by it suddenly being gone.
And judging from RecentChanges, several editors use it regularly to develop scripts, lua or MediaWiki tests etc..
Some people who are admin on test2 or have other elevate rights, might not have those rights on test.wp.org
DJ
On 27 jan. 2016, at 23:18, Alex Monk alex@wikimedia.org wrote:
+1 from me for closing it. Do people have important things there, or can it be 'deleted'?
On 27 January 2016 at 22:01, Chad innocentkiller@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:00 PM James Forrester jforrester@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 27 January 2016 at 13:57, Ori Livneh ori@wikimedia.org wrote:
The setup of test2.wikipedia.org is no longer meaningfully different
from
test.wikipedia.org. Is there a good reason for keeping test2?
I'd be happy for it to be closed.
It was only setup ever so we could write/test het deploy.
It became way less useful after we stopped serving test(1) from NFS.
Close it.
-Chad _______________________________________________ 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
There appears to be one periodic Jenkins job running against test2wiki, and it just started failing today, so we should investigate why.[1] Release Engineering will look into moving this job to testwiki, but please don't shut down test2wiki just yet.
[1] https://integration.wikimedia.org/ci/view/BrowserTests/view/-Dashboard/job/b...
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:57 PM, Ori Livneh ori@wikimedia.org wrote:
The setup of test2.wikipedia.org is no longer meaningfully different from test.wikipedia.org. Is there a good reason for keeping test2? _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 01/28/2016 08:57 AM, Ori Livneh wrote:
The setup of test2.wikipedia.org is no longer meaningfully different from test.wikipedia.org. Is there a good reason for keeping test2?
Especially when debugging and testing cross-wiki features, it is extremely useful to have two test wikis to use. MassMessage, GlobalCssJs, GlobalUserPage, and now cross-wiki notifications were all initially deployed using testwiki as the "central" wiki, and test2wiki as a "client" wiki.
Maybe testwikidatawiki could be used in place of test2wiki, but that's already a bit special...
-- Legoktm
On 27 January 2016 at 17:16, Legoktm legoktm.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Especially when debugging and testing cross-wiki features, it is extremely useful to have two test wikis to use. MassMessage, GlobalCssJs, GlobalUserPage, and now cross-wiki notifications were all initially deployed using testwiki as the "central" wiki, and test2wiki as a "client" wiki.
That sounds like a good reason to keep it, especially since global notifications is an active, ongoing work. Perhaps, as an alternative to shutting it down, we should just make it clearer that test2.wikipedia.org is primarily intended for that purpose on that wiki's main page (or anywhere else thought appropriate). If there's some specific overhead to keeping test2 alive that might outweigh that benefit, now would seem to be the time to make it clear. :-)
Dan
Il 28/01/2016 02:30, Dan Garry ha scritto:
On 27 January 2016 at 17:16, Legoktm legoktm.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Especially when debugging and testing cross-wiki features, it is extremely useful to have two test wikis to use. MassMessage, GlobalCssJs, GlobalUserPage, and now cross-wiki notifications were all initially deployed using testwiki as the "central" wiki, and test2wiki as a "client" wiki.
That sounds like a good reason to keep it, especially since global notifications is an active, ongoing work. Perhaps, as an alternative to shutting it down, we should just make it clearer that test2.wikipedia.org is primarily intended for that purpose on that wiki's main page (or anywhere else thought appropriate). If there's some specific overhead to keeping test2 alive that might outweigh that benefit, now would seem to be the time to make it clear. :-)
Dan
I second Legoktm's comment. And, for what it's worth, I don't think it makes much sense to limit test2wiki to a specific purpose.
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Ricordisamoa <ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org
wrote:
Il 28/01/2016 02:30, Dan Garry ha scritto:
On 27 January 2016 at 17:16, Legoktm legoktm.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
Especially when debugging and testing cross-wiki features, it is
extremely useful to have two test wikis to use. MassMessage, GlobalCssJs, GlobalUserPage, and now cross-wiki notifications were all initially deployed using testwiki as the "central" wiki, and test2wiki as a "client" wiki.
That sounds like a good reason to keep it, especially since global
notifications is an active, ongoing work. Perhaps, as an alternative to shutting it down, we should just make it clearer that test2.wikipedia.org is primarily intended for that purpose on that wiki's main page (or anywhere else thought appropriate). If there's some specific overhead to keeping test2 alive that might outweigh that benefit, now would seem to be the time to make it clear. :-)
Dan
I second Legoktm's comment. And, for what it's worth, I don't think it makes much sense to limit test2wiki to a specific purpose.
Ok, understood. Keeping it around costs little. Dan, in case you were volunteering, please go ahead and document the purpose of test2 on its main page and/or wikitech -- I think it is a good idea.
If it is cheap to keep it, why did I even bother asking? I'm glad you asked!
As the Wikimedia software stack evolves, some of its components become vestigial. Their existence makes it harder for anyone to form a systematic understanding of the whole, because they don't have any clear functional relationships with others components. And since they're not on anybody's mind, they have a tendency to become "gotchas" for future upgrades and migrations. So it's good to get rid of them, even if the resource costs are small.
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Ori Livneh ori@wikimedia.org wrote:
Ok, understood. Keeping it around costs little. Dan, in case you were volunteering, please go ahead and document the purpose of test2 on its main page and/or wikitech -- I think it is a good idea.
If it is cheap to keep it, why did I even bother asking? I'm glad you asked!
As the Wikimedia software stack evolves, some of its components become vestigial. Their existence makes it harder for anyone to form a systematic understanding of the whole, because they don't have any clear functional relationships with others components. And since they're not on anybody's mind, they have a tendency to become "gotchas" for future upgrades and migrations. So it's good to get rid of them, even if the resource costs are small.
Hi Ori,
Thanks for bringing this seemingly vestigial weirdness to our attention. As you say, it should be documented better.
As I'm reading this, you are still making the case that we should still shut this down. Given the amount of mailing list traffic this has generated, not everyone agrees. Rather than continuing this conversation on wikitech-l, could you file a Phab task for this (e.g. "Decommission test2.wikipedia.org"), and direct the conversation there? That will help people who care about this topic not only have a more focused audience for their comments, but will also give us a good way of tracking all of the things Phab tasks typically track (e.g. owner, priority, dependencies, resolution)
Rob
On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Rob Lanphier robla@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi Ori,
Thanks for bringing this seemingly vestigial weirdness to our attention. As you say, it should be documented better.
As I'm reading this, you are still making the case that we should still shut this down.
Sorry, I should have been clearer. Given the responses (which identified clear and reasonable use-cases), I think it's perfectly fine to keep it around. I just wanted to explain why I bothered asking in the first place.
On 27 January 2016 at 22:51, Ori Livneh ori@wikimedia.org wrote:
Ok, understood. Keeping it around costs little. Dan, in case you were volunteering, please go ahead and document the purpose of test2 on its main page and/or wikitech -- I think it is a good idea.
I would be happy to!
I made some changes https://test2.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Main_Page&type=revision&diff=166672&oldid=166350 to the main page of test2. I also made some changes https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Test2.wikipedia.org&type=revision&diff=277482&oldid=158407 to the test2 page on wikitech. Feel free to review and improve.
Thanks, Dan
On Jan 27, 2016 9:57 PM, "Ori Livneh" ori@wikimedia.org wrote:
The setup of test2.wikipedia.org is no longer meaningfully different from test.wikipedia.org. Is there a good reason for keeping test2?
test2 is used a bit for testing wikibase client stuff like for lua templates. Forget why but test2 has had wikibase client long before it was enabled on test Wikipedia.
As wikidata developer, when we roll out new features like arbitrary access, I also like to have one test Wikipedia with it and one without (while some wikipedias don't have said feature yet). Helps if we need to debug one or other setup, or if a bug sneaks by all our phpunit etc tests and beta and affects one of the configurations, then test + test2 can help.
I don't think there is so much extra maintenance burden of having test2 around to justify closing it, vs benefits it can give. Cheers, Katie
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org