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@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@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l