On 29 Sep 2016 10:10 pm, "Marcin Cieslak" <saper(a)saper.info> wrote:
Dnia 28.09.2016 Quim Gil <qgil(a)wikimedia.org> napisaĆ/a:
Summit sessions are considered tasks themselves,
not just a conversation
happening in a room and eventually documented in a wiki page.
I think this kind of captures the opinions expressed here very well
(if it could be one sentence).
a. Some folk prefer Phabricator because it provides workflow, tracking,
boards, hierarchy (task->substask), explicit (scrollable) history,
short URL's.
These are some things that Phabricator does very well, and it wouldn't make
sense to reinvent the wheel to put them in MediaWiki - MediaWiki is a wiki
after all, and not dedicated project management/bug tracker software.
b. Others prefer MediaWiki because it is easier to cooperate in-place,
visual editor, better search, good linking, readable titles and being
loyal
to our own tools.
Phabricator's linking to tasks is good when you use the {resource} format.
The MediaWiki visual editor is good, and it can be used on mobile, unlike
Phabricator's preview mode when adding comments to tasks, which has never
worked.
I'd say (a) set of requirements is better for typical (classic) project
management, for something bound in time and resources that needs to be
managed swiftly.
Set (b) of requirements provides better community involvement,
transparency
and it is easier to maintain things that are perpetual
work in progress
(never need to be really "done").
(a) is better for "fast moving consumer goods" of sorts,
(b) is better for long-term stuff.
But wiki is not a "final resting place" of a documentation polished
elsewhere. Things should not become "eventually documented
in a wiki page").
Agree.
In my other note I wrote how CCC is using pentabarf submission and
conference scheduling tool for (a) and MediaWiki for (b) probably
for the same reasons we have here.
I think I kind of share both points of view: my event organiser's brain
is with (a) but my volunteer heart is with (b).
One nice solution would be to teach Phabricator to treat links
to wiki items as first-class objects that can be tagged, prioritized,
deadlined, assigned, traced etc. I could imagine having MediaWiki pages
as items on the project board and some correspondence between categories
and phab tasks and boards. A casual look on the Phabricator does not
reveal we have a Task for that (but it might be I could not find it) .
There is one more thing that may explain why we are having this discussion
for now: Phabricator filled with content we have at the moment is very
difficult to search. I literally have to remember titles of the tasks
Phabricator search is terrible. I have trouble every time I need to find
something on Phabricator, to the point that it is easier to go and search
through where I originally found out about the task, e.g. IRC logs.
to try to somehow find them again. I have a feeling
(that might be our
fault and not software's) that it's filled with temporal junk
which was there only for the purpose of some workflow/tracking sometime
ago. I somehow feel our Phabricator instance is overloaded with
those shooting starts (events, shortlived action items etc.).
This has started to annoy me some time ago (especially given
my ad-hoc and seasonal interest in MediaWiki development) but
it has never overflowed enough to say something about it,
I just sighed and moved on.
I think many participants in this thread feel something similar
and this thread just got hijacked to express something
a bit broader than the original purpose of this discussion.
Saper
sent from a desktop device. please excuse my verbosity.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
tom29739
(this was sent from my phone, so please excuse any grammatical/spelling
errors)