In article BANLkTi=ewlyapcjlripf9ubjuni+kya...@mail.gmail.com,
Raul Kern rauna...@gmail.com wrote:
My understanding is that merely displaying the Like button allows
Facebook to track the browsing of anyone who visits the page, whether
they have a Facebook account or not.
So it's better to
In article c9d1ecb6.10b4...@mzmcbride.com,
MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
Raul Kern wrote:
how to add facebook like box to chapters mediawiki homepage:
http://et.wikimedia.org
[...]
The bigger concern would be whether doing so is acceptable under the
Wikimedia Foundation's privacy
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article 4d75458d.3090...@panix.com,
Sumana Harihareswara suma...@panix.com wrote:
On 03/04/2011, River Tarnell r.tarn...@ieee.org wrote:
I wasn't planning to attend this event, but I might come if people are
discussing the Toolserver... do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article 4d6faefd.5030...@panix.com,
Sumana Harihareswara suma...@panix.com wrote:
* toolserver's purpose and services, since we'll be in Berlin
I wasn't planning to attend this event, but I might come if people are
discussing the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article 87k4gtb20p@everybody.org,
Mark A. Hershberger mhershber...@wikimedia.org wrote:
(I can't test Oracle, so I don't know anything about it. I agree we
should have it working, but I don't think it should be a blocker if it
isn't
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article 18849937.7157.1297583642909.javamail.r...@benjamin.baylink.com,
Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
Yeah, secure.wikimedia.org's URL scheme isn't really friendly
to outsiders. Historically, this is because SSL certificates are
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article cfb39d2bb60f411485d2be6d9db07...@gmail.com,
Leo diebu...@gmail.com wrote:
there are actually providers like www.startssl.com who issue free
certificates (only validated by email address though).
StartSSLs root certificate is included
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article AANLkTikgDVs2zHMBzrd5dDkjsjadQVLmHjYpfjBhY+=n...@mail.gmail.com,
Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 10:14 AM, River Tarnell r.tarn...@ieee.org wrote:
SSL certificates aren't that cheap, but only
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article AANLkTi=nq2tookvgmhrxbegvr6fzxe1wzv9dbzde4...@mail.gmail.com,
Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote:
Have a bugathon where we label a lot of bugs as appropriate bugathon bugs
that need either:
a) test patch / update patch to recent svn
In article 87wrlbfbtt@jidanni.org, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
j == jidanni jida...@jidanni.org writes:
j Fetch from 'news.tcx.org.uk'
j Using netcat on port 119 shows that he changed the group name to
j tcx.lists.wikimedia.gendergap .
Which doesn't work for me either. If anybody gets
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In article 87r5bj89oy@jidanni.org, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
Some articles can't be read:
Hm, this is due to a problem with how the list archive was imported.
Some messages have the wrong Newsgroups or Xref header, e.g. the article
you
In article 87wrlh3et9@jidanni.org, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
Better set the Reply-to headers, like they do on
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.org.wikimedia.mediawiki/36699/raw !
What do you think it should be set to? Gmane retains the original
Reply-To header from the mail (which is set to
In article iietdr$2sm$1...@dough.gmane.org,
Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote:
River Tarnell wrote:
What do you think it should be set to? Gmane retains the original
Reply-To header from the mail (which is set to the list address by
Mailman), but this means that anyone who replies
In article 20110202090948.gd97...@ilythia.tcx.org.uk,
River Tarnell r.tarn...@ieee.org wrote:
I've added all current public mailing lists, and retention is set to
forever, so it also acts as an archive.
I've now added a basic web interface:
http://news.tcx.org.uk/group/wikimedia.
as well
In article 19663836.4613.1296766691647.javamail.r...@benjamin.baylink.com,
Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com
I have to admit to having been negligent in examining the IPv6
readiness of the Mediawiki software. Is it
In article 30181972.4621.1296767510190.javamail.r...@benjamin.baylink.com,
Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: River Tarnell r.tarn...@ieee.org
As long as the proxy supports IPv6, it can continue to talk to Apache
via IPv4; since WMF's internal network uses
In article aanlktikbwloyhzy4jln6jwkphfjotgo-ppqxfwupf...@mail.gmail.com,
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
It doesn't matter if Apache supports IPv6, since the Internet-facing
HTTP servers for wikis are reverse proxies, either Squid or Varnish.
I believe the version of Squid that WMF
In article AANLkTinQPPu_j=0emuaf2xojthqsxdluw0btggu8z...@mail.gmail.com,
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
It's not really a 6to4 NAT per se - it's a 6to4 application level
proxy. The question is, what does Squid hand off to Apache via a IPv4
back end connection if the front end
In article AANLkTi=OnSreaXMi3Gc+0==tzoq1jfix63xrkthv6...@mail.gmail.com,
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
Q: Are we doing tproxy between the squids and apache servers?
No. But since you mention it, LVS (Linux kernel-level load balancer) is
used for load balancing, for both Squid
In article 9259756.4629.1296769269783.javamail.r...@benjamin.baylink.com,
Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
- Original Message -
From: River Tarnell r.tarn...@ieee.org
Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
how would a 6to4NAT affect blocking?
ISP NATs are a separate issue, and might
In article aanlktikpg8sdnmgwkn2xmw2agqok1gdyuiopf7qbm...@mail.gmail.com,
Brion Vibber br...@pobox.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 1:41 PM, Jay Ashworth j...@baylink.com wrote:
If we NAT between the squids and the apaches, will that adversely affect
the ability of MW to *know* the outside
In article aanlktikgm845zovsgqpdvq81juhn8wm3rwzcxvbqn...@mail.gmail.com,
Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
ISPs are just going to start forcing users to use NAT more
aggressively, use tunnelling, etc.
ISPs will probably do this, but I don't think it's right to say they'll
In article AANLkTi=nsymtrlv7dwrpixj-wnrpjkvgwyixs+zjc...@mail.gmail.com,
Anthony wikim...@inbox.org wrote:
Is there a standard for using IPv6 inside X-Forwarded-For headers?
There is no standard for X-Forwarded-For at all.
I would think you'd need a new header altogether.
Since there's nothing
In article aanlktim3ht9hxau3sgwmfu9mph9gb2rx2misg3vmc...@mail.gmail.com,
Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm glad this thread soon got to the point where we realise the
problem is on the application layer level.
If that was the only problem, this would be much simpler.
So what
In article AANLkTi=1foHsEOh25Dr+Df2N4DFXj4iKU0SWXg1xXWP=@mail.gmail.com,
Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 5:02 PM, River Tarnell r.tarn...@ieee.org wrote:
ISPs will probably do this, but I don't think it's right to say they'll
*just* do this. Â In the US
In article AANLkTi=enp2_sy+g2dt_sw0oq8-05_jjcojgxsdt0...@mail.gmail.com,
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 3:21 PM, Aryeh Gregor
simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, but they'll have IPv4 access as well.
There won't be much choice when the ISPs run out of
In article AANLkTikS7Kcenbz94UjhfOYi6usRGSSf5VBrQCpK=v...@mail.gmail.com,
George Herbert george.herb...@gmail.com wrote:
Broken IPv6 routing will be evident to the providers and users,
because nothing will work. I would expect few complaints to us...
(perhaps naively...)
This is actually more
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
River Tarnell:
I've set up an NNTP gateway for Wikimedia mailing lists. The
wikimedia.* hierarchy is available via news.tcx.org.uk. More
information: http://news.tcx.org.uk/wikimedia.html.
Okay, after a bit of fiddling I think I'm ready
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
I've set up an NNTP gateway for Wikimedia mailing lists. The
wikimedia.* hierarchy is available via news.tcx.org.uk. More
information: http://news.tcx.org.uk/wikimedia.html.
Unlike GMane, this gateway does not rename lists (all lists are
In article 4d47370a.5030...@nadir-seen-fire.com,
Daniel Friesen li...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote:
On 11-01-31 01:47 PM, River Tarnell wrote:
I've set up an NNTP gateway for Wikimedia mailing lists. The
wikimedia.* hierarchy is available via news.tcx.org.uk. More
information:http
In article 4d47502f.1070...@nadir-seen-fire.com,
Daniel Friesen li...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote:
On 11-01-31 03:43 PM, River Tarnell wrote:
This is a test post. If you can see it, then posting is now working (at
least somewhat).
I see it off gmane. However either it hasn't made it to the new
In article 4d47502f.1070...@nadir-seen-fire.com,
Daniel Friesen li...@nadir-seen-fire.com wrote:
On 11-01-31 03:43 PM, River Tarnell wrote:
This is a test post. If you can see it, then posting is now working (at
least somewhat).
I see it off gmane. However either it hasn't made it to the new
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Gerard Meijssen:
This is what is called a pent up demand. Given the relevance given to the
meeting, I hope that there will be hacker das in Argentiana. I know for a
fact that when Wikimania hits Amsterdam in 2010, there will be hacker days.
please
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aryeh Gregor:
If I understand correctly, the only change being contemplated here is not
replicating the databases that are entirely secret (databases of private
wikis).
this is correct.
I might be misunderstanding, though. If only entire
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Morten Warncke-Wang:
What do you think? Seem like a useful idea if we can find sufficient
resources, and put together a management plan?
no, like Daniel said, this is a waste of time and effort. i originally assumed
that a research toolserver
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brion Vibber:
Could be done. We're also fine with new toolserver roots as long as we
approve em too for now.
it would have been nice if the Toolserver was aware of this ;-)
- river.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
in case anyone here is interested...
- - Forwarded message from River Tarnell
ri...@loreley.flyingparchment.org.uk -
Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 23:56:10 +
From: River Tarnell ri...@loreley.flyingparchment.org.uk
To: toolserver-annou
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aryeh Gregor:
I don't think the toolserver is used for backups.
it is, but only in the sense that it's our only off-site copy of the database.
it was not created to act as a backup...
At least I hope it's not, given its reliability (which is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Rohde:
In particular, I think it is useful to separate tools from analysis.
why?
Tools need high availability and low lag relative to the live site, but
analysis doesn't care if it gets out of date and should use scheduling etc.
to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrea Forte:
Let me know if you have a grant proposal you'd like help with!
well, i'm still not sure what exactly people need. perhaps the various
academic people could produce a list of what they want to do on the toolserver
and what's missing at
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian:
I vote for making the toolserver the head-node to a much larger beowulf
cluster that has a well configured job scheduler.
so the issue is that more CPU is needed to run the research jobs? how much
more? do you have an example of a job and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Rohde:
The starting point is providing full-text history availability and once you
have that there are a number of different projects (like wikiblame) which
would desire to pull and process every revision in some way.
okay, so full text
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
phoebe ayers:
Personally, I think a dedicated toolserver is a great idea for the research
community, but I know very little about the technical issues involved and/or
whether this has been proposed before. Please comment, and I can pass on
replies
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Aryeh Gregor:
Oh. Why does a single specific person have to handle the approval of
all toolserver account requests, then?
because accounts have to be approved by WM-DE, and WM-DE has designated this
person to approve accounts on their behalf.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
phoebe ayers:
River: Well, you say that part of the issue with the toolserver is money and
time... and this person that I've been talking to is offering to throw money
and time at the problem. So, what can they constructively do?
i think this is
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrea Forte:
To give you an idea, for me personally, the incentive for a new resource is a
need for a server (perhaps a cluster) to support full-text queries at a
reasonable speed.
then why not help us do this on the existing toolserver, so
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Robert Ullmann:
What is with this?
wrong list. the Foundation needs to allocate the resources to fix dumps. it
hasn't done so, therefore dumps are still broken. perhaps you might ask the
Foundation why dumps have such a low priority.
-
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
jida...@jidanni.org:
$ HEAD -PS http://en.wikipedia.org/
HEAD http://en.wikipedia.org/ -- 403 Forbidden
change your user-agent.
- river.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (HP-UX)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Andrew Garrett:
On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 11:03 AM, jida...@jidanni.org wrote:
Can the gmane administrators have permission to turn email address
encryption
Why?
it prevents seeing people's real email addresses, and it breaks PGP signing.
it's
49 matches
Mail list logo
