Hoi, Code review should be a strictly technical process surely. However the community CANNOT decide on everything. The WMF has one codebase for MediaWiki and it explicitly defines with long lead times the things it is working on. It does invite the community to be involved in the process. However, this is where and when the technical future is decided. Several of the decisions do not have an option for a community to decide they want it or not when they are confronted with the realised software/future.
You know our projects, you know our licenses. If you, the "community"do not like what you have, you can fork. At Wikimania forking and leaving the community was very much discussed. Watch Jimbo's presentation for instance, he may be aghast that I quote him here but in his state of the Wiki he made it abundantly clear that it is your option to stay or go. Thanks, GerardM
On 11 August 2014 08:55, Strainu strainu10@gmail.com wrote:
2014-08-10 17:00 GMT+03:00 Michał Łazowik mlazowik@me.com:
Wiadomość napisana przez Nicolas Vervelle nvervelle@gmail.com w dniu
10 sie 2014, o godz. 15:45:
I hope it's not an other step from WMF to prevent the application of community decisions when they not agree with it. I fear that they will
use
this to bypass community decisions. For example like forcing again VE on everyone on enwki: last year, sysop were able to apply community
decision
against Erik wishes only because they had access to site wide js or CSS.
I'd like to believe that code-reviewing would mean improving code
quality, security
and performance (applies to javascript).
I would like to believe that too. More likely though, without a serious comittment from the Foundation (which I heard nothing about), that would mean waiting for months, possibly years for reviews on small wikis.
Also, code review should be a strictly technical process and should not be used to overrule the community's decisions.
Strainu
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l