[MediaWiki-l] What PHP version do you use?

Bill Traynor btraynor at gmail.com
Mon Dec 7 21:25:35 UTC 2015

Perhaps I'm confused, but it sounds to me like there are certain
classes of MediaWiki administrators out there.  There's those who
would prefer a hands free experience, or at the very least a point and
click GUI-based administration experience and those that are would
prefer a more command-line based, power-user administrative
experience.  Am I wrong?

Personally, I fall in the latter group.  I prefer to track MediaWiki
and all extensions from the command line using Git.  I've never used
Composer up to this point and have had no problems.

My only gripe about MediaWiki is that the development road map seems
to be directed foremost by the needs of Wikimedia in support of
Wikipedia.  Of course, I can't really complain as it's FOSS and if I
was highly motivated, I could develop the things I really want.
Examples being somewhat "enterprisey", like better Oracle support,
finer grained and flexible content management, etc. etc.

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Francis Franck <francis.franck at gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm afraid you've got a point there, Boris. Your not alone.
> Contrary to you, I 've (up to now) tried to keep everything up to date. I
> must now admit that the advantages of doing so are rapidly vanishing. Too
> often this ends in a time consuming trial and error, leading into fault
> messages and malfunction, hence a loss of confidence. I think I will change
> policies and keep things as they are until I notice a more coherent upgrade
> approach.
> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 9:34 PM, Boris Steipe <boris.steipe at utoronto.ca>
> wrote:
>> Just to counter that, you are overlooking a crucial point ...
>> On Dec 7, 2015, at 11:44 AM, Ray Paseur <ray.paseur at armedia.com> wrote:
>> > I believe that using the latest software is almost always a good idea.
>> We are going to upgrade eventually - why deny ourselves the benefits of the
>> latest software by putting off the upgrades?  The only argument in favor of
>> delay would be a breaking change, and this is something that the authors of
>> the software must publicize.
>> I hold off updates as long as at all possible, the reason being that over
>> the last years new versions of the software have almost never come with
>> tangible benefits to my core use. It is almost always just fixing
>> edge-cases we don't care about and better support for things we don't use.
>> Why? Because we have developed a workflow around the software as it existed
>> about three years ago and there is really no reason to change that. The
>> benefit of not using the latest is that we get to skip releases and frankly
>> every single release just takes way, way to long to install and verify and
>> fix across our multiple Wikis. Every release I can skip gives me half a day
>> of my life!
>> The release cycles are too short. As far as I'm concerned, MediaWiki works
>> oK, if it would do just what it does; that would be nice, and aspiring to
>> anything else is just not what I'm interested in. The only reason why I'm
>> constantly on the lookout for alternatives to MW are the frequent
>> required/recommended updates.
>> I'm pretty sure I'm not alone in this.
>> Now, if a new version would come out that would autoupdate and configure
>> itself and make sure it keeps on working with my (completely standard)
>> extensions, that would be nice. Too modern?
>> Boris
>> _______________________________________________
>> MediaWiki-l mailing list
>> To unsubscribe, go to:
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
> _______________________________________________
> MediaWiki-l mailing list
> To unsubscribe, go to:
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l

More information about the MediaWiki-l mailing list