On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 2:00 PM James Forrester <jforrester(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: 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

On 27 January 2016 at 14:18, Alex Monk <alex(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: ​We could just move all the content into testwiki and redirect the ​domain. ;-) ​J. -- James D. Forrester Lead Product Manager, Editing Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. jforrester(a)wikimedia.org | @jdforrester

On 27 January 2016 at 17:16, Legoktm <legoktm.wikipedia(a)gmail.com> wrote: 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 -- Dan Garry Lead Product Manager, Discovery Wikimedia Foundation

On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Ricordisamoa <ricordisamoa(a)openmailbox.org > Il 28/01/2016 02:30, Dan Garry ha scritto: > >> On 27 January 2016 at 17:16, Legoktm <legoktm.wikipedia(a)gmail.com>> >> 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 Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Rob Lanphier <robla(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: 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.