[Wikimedia-l] Let's have the courage to sit down and talk about VisualEditor

[Risker]

On 31 July 2013 13:32, rupert THURNER <rupert.thurner at gmail.com> wrote:

> Am 31.07.2013 15:07 schrieb "Risker" <risker.wp at gmail.com>:
> >
> > On 31 July 2013 08:36, David Gerard <dgerard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On 31 July 2013 10:59, rupert THURNER <rupert.thurner at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > >> de:wp convinced you. What would it take to convince you on en:wp?
> (I'm
> > > >> asking for a clear objective criterion here. If you can only offer a
> > > >> subjective one, please explain how de:wp convinced you when en:wp
> > > >> hasn't.)
> > >
> > > > Hi David, i am editing on dewp and enwp. I consider myself an
> experienced
> > > > editor, but not an expert. I did not participate voting in dewp, but
> i
> > > like
> > > > to try ve from time to time. Beeing a software developper I fully
> support
> > > > eriks arguments before. Imo pragmatic and flexible decisions help
> such
> > > > development a lot, just like Erik explained.
> > >
> > >
> > > Certainly. However, it's the obvious question to ask, and a curious
> > > question to spend several paragraphs not answering.
> > >
> > > Erik, James - how did de:wp convinced you when en:wp hasn't?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > I would also like to see a direct answer to David's very specific
> > question.
> >
> From a software developers standpoint its nice to have the 2 biggest wikis
> following a different strategy. Enwp is enough to get a lot of testers. But
> some accommodation of the users comes with it. Switching over wpde later
> gets again not accommodated and more critical feedback.
>
>
Without rejecting your position, what we really want to hear is Erik
Moeller's reasoning, in his role as VP Engineering.  It was Erik's
decision, and we want him to explain his reasoning in his own words.

Risker