Il 10/08/2014 15:27, Erik Moeller ha scritto:
In the long run, we will want to apply a code review process to these changes
as with any other deployed code
The latest version of the Pywikibot framework could be useful to you.
We recently introduced custom protection levels, and I think you
Hi Gerard,
Some answers (in a random order).
2014-08-11 12:20 GMT+03:00 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com:
You know our projects, you know our licenses. If you, the communitydo not
like what you have, you can fork. At Wikimania forking and leaving the
community was very much
Hoi,
When I watch Jimmy, it is a lot like Wikipedia. There is a lot I like but I
do not like everything. This time was no different. However LIKE Wikipedia
there is so much that I like that I will not abandon it.
The notion that the community is free to choose whatever negates the
technical point
Straniu, Jimbo's comments in his keynote about forking concerned
encouraging competent editors who can't work cooperatively with other
people to fork in a way that would be better for everyone in the long run.
I don't believe this disappointing confrontation between the WMF and
volunteers were
2014-08-10 17:00 GMT+03:00 Michał Łazowik mlazo...@me.com:
Wiadomość napisana przez Nicolas Vervelle nverve...@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
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,
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, at 19:20, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
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
Hoi,
This is simply not true. At Wikimania there were several sessions where the
topic was what will the technical underpinnings be of our software. It was
also discussed to some extend what kind of effect things may have on a
community. When you are in those conversations you realise that many
Il 11/08/2014 11:36, svetlana ha scritto:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, at 19:20, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
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
On 11 August 2014 10:56, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote:
The same is going to happen for Flow (which I strongly believe is needed,
but is being deployed untimely)
Flow is neither ready nor proposed for wider deployment yet, so I do not
understand your comment.
Other than its
On Aug 11, 2014 12:04 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 11 August 2014 10:56, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org
wrote:
The same is going to happen for Flow (which I strongly believe is
needed,
but is being deployed untimely)
Flow is neither ready nor proposed for
Then there's something wrong somewhere since what is eventually perceived
by active remote community is just a wall of semi-clueless decisionism.
Vito
Inviato con AquaMail per Android
http://www.aqua-mail.com
Il 11 agosto 2014 11:45:56 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com ha
scritto:
On 11 August 2014 10:56, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote:
Why aren't they implementing a global repository for gadgets, modules,
templates which is (IMHO) what the community needs first?
We are.
SUL finalisation (which is broadly a blocker to much of this work) is
currently
On 11 August 2014 11:08, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is where part of the problem lies. Will discussion on whether
or not to deploy it to a local wiki still be possible when the WMF decides
it is ready for wider deployment, with a possible no for an answer?
An: Wikimedia developers
Betreff: Re: [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you
On 11 August 2014 11:08, Martijn Hoekstra martijnhoeks...@gmail.com wrote:
I think this is where part of the problem lies. Will discussion on
whether or not to deploy it to a local wiki still
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, at 19:56, Ricordisamoa wrote:
Why aren't they implementing a global repository for gadgets, modules,
templates which is (IMHO) what the community needs first?
THANK YOU! you are, alone, worth a whole engineering team
___
Almost every WMF developer attended Wikimania this year, and there was
quite a lot of fruitful discussion and feedback given. Somewhat
surprisingly (to me, it was my first Wikimania) the tone in person was
quite different than what you might expect from email list traffic. Perhaps
that was
Il 11/08/2014 12:27, James Forrester ha scritto:
On 11 August 2014 10:56, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote:
Why aren't they implementing a global repository for gadgets, modules,
templates which is (IMHO) what the community needs first?
We are.
SUL finalisation (which is
C. Scott Ananian canan...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Almost every WMF developer attended Wikimania this year, and there was
quite a lot of fruitful discussion and feedback given. Somewhat
surprisingly (to me, it was my first Wikimania) the tone in person was
quite different than what you might
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 12:24 PM, Tim Landscheidt t...@tim-landscheidt.de
wrote:
{{cn}}
More like the attendees were those who could afford to go and/or were given
scholarship.
*-- *
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2016
Major in Computer Science
So I'd just like to make one point, I think this superprotect right has
proper technical implications and use cases. In other words, while you guys
may disagree with how it is currently being used (e.g., the MediaViewer
drama and whatnot), I think it is a good idea, and I am actually surprised
On Aug 11, 2014 12:51 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerro...@gmail.com wrote:
More like the attendees were those who could afford to go and/or were
given
scholarship.
Some people could afford to go if it were closer or can't take that much
time off but if it happens to be nearby then they can come for a
Someone could also say the coup d'état has been done when too many people
was traveling.
Anyway there are simply different views between many tech guys
entusiasticly trying to push out new features and many people from the
daily community side emphasizing need for partecipation and
On Aug 11, 2014 1:24 PM, Tim Landscheidt t...@tim-landscheidt.de wrote:
C. Scott Ananian canan...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Almost every WMF developer attended Wikimania this year, and there was
quite a lot of fruitful discussion and feedback given. Somewhat
surprisingly (to me, it was my
On Aug 11, 2014 7:58 AM, svetlana svetl...@fastmail.com.au wrote:
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014, at 19:56, Ricordisamoa wrote:
Why aren't they implementing a global repository for gadgets, modules,
templates which is (IMHO) what the community needs first?
THANK YOU! you are, alone, worth a whole
Now, having observed that not only user Eloquence (aka Erik Moeller)
himself engaged in the enforcement of superprotect right on de.wp
[1] but soon after a workaround was published a change was deployed
[2, 3] as counter measurement to block any possible interference can
no longer be
Brian Wolff bawo...@gmail.com wrote:
Almost every WMF developer attended Wikimania this year, and there was
quite a lot of fruitful discussion and feedback given. Somewhat
surprisingly (to me, it was my first Wikimania) the tone in person was
quite different than what you might expect
Hi,
[Putting purely the mw dev hat on]
I'm putting a hat on from pure observer point of view as neither a
member of de.wp nor wmf.
So dont complain that mw fixes a bug in how page protection. If you are
I'm not complaining, I'm observing the events that happened around the
introduction of
Looks like the only change here was to the Wikimedia config, not the
MediaWiki software defaults (and thus be subject to a normal release
schedule). Instead, this seems to have been done quickly just for the
purpose of enforcing something against the wishes of the community.
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org
wrote:
hopelessI'd really like to hear Jimbo's opinion on the matter/hopeless
A few years ago, Jimbo came by en.wn, and we were trying to explain to him
how our project infrastructure works. Understand, a central part
Is wikitech-l really the best place for this discussion?
-- Lewis Cawte (Lcawte)
On 11 August 2014 18:44, pi zero wn.pi.z...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 3:12 PM, Ricordisamoa
ricordisa...@openmailbox.org
wrote:
hopelessI'd really like to hear Jimbo's opinion on the
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Brian Wolff bawo...@gmail.com wrote:
Now, having observed that not only user Eloquence (aka Erik Moeller)
himself engaged in the enforcement of superprotect right on de.wp
[1] but soon after a workaround was published a change was deployed
[2, 3] as counter
On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Lewis Cawte lewisca...@googlemail.com
wrote:
Is wikitech-l really the best place for this discussion?
-- Lewis Cawte (Lcawte)
Perhaps not. I'd actually replied to the message, and didn't even notice
which list it was on.
Pi zero
: Re: [Wikitech-l] Superprotect user right, Comming to a wiki near you
Is wikitech-l really the best place for this discussion?
-- Lewis Cawte (Lcawte)
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using AMPGpg
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
On 11/08/14 16:54, Tyler Romeo wrote:
There are many legitimate cases (e.g., office actions and copyright-related
issues) where I could see the superprotect level coming in handy. There are
some cases where the WMF simply cannot afford (usually b/c of legal
reasons) to trust the community, even
On Aug 11, 2014 2:34 PM, James HK jamesin.hongkon...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
[Putting purely the mw dev hat on]
I'm putting a hat on from pure observer point of view as neither a
member of de.wp nor wmf.
Note: that i consider my mw dev hat to not involve wmf.
So dont complain that mw
Sorry wrong url, i meant https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/153345/ not the
url i wrote.
Anyways, if the original email was complaining about the config change and
not the delete/edit rights change then its much more reasonable. i thus
take back my previous email.
--bawolff
On Aug 11, 2014 3:45
Il 11/08/2014 12:27, James Forrester ha scritto:
On 11 August 2014 10:56, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote:
Why aren't they implementing a global repository for gadgets, modules,
templates which is (IMHO) what the community needs first?
We are.
SUL finalisation (which is
Lets all welcome the new overlord Erik.
Add a new protection level called superprotect
Assigned to nobody by default. Requested by Erik Möller for the purposes
of protecting pages such that sysop permissions are not sufficient to
edit them.
Change-Id: Idfa211257dbacc7623d42393257de1525ff01e9e
Hi folks,
Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
apply a code
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014, at 23:19, K. Peachey wrote:
Lets all welcome the new overlord Erik.
Add a new protection level called superprotect
Assigned to nobody by default. Requested by Erik Möller for the purposes
of protecting pages such that sysop permissions are not sufficient to
edit them.
Le 10 août 2014 15:35, svetlana svetl...@fastmail.com.au a écrit :
On Sun, 10 Aug 2014, at 23:19, K. Peachey wrote:
Lets all welcome the new overlord Erik.
Add a new protection level called superprotect
Assigned to nobody by default. Requested by Erik Möller for the purposes
of
On 10 aug. 2014, at 14:27, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
MediaWiki: namespace to disable site features is unacceptable. If such
a conflict arises, we're prepared to revoke permissions if required.
This protection level
Wiadomość napisana przez Nicolas Vervelle nverve...@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
Totally agree with that, dirty common.js hacks aren't really beneficial
for anyone.
Cheers,
Marius
On Sun, 2014-08-10 at 14:56 +0100, Derk-Jan Hartman wrote:
On 10 aug. 2014, at 14:27, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
However, we've clarified in a number of venues that use of the
Hi Erik,
I understand you reasoning, but you couldn't have communicated and timed
this in a worse way. You might be doing the right thing, but because of
this ill communication and timing, this will be completely overshadowed.
That saddens me. Good luck with the shit storm :-(
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 9:00 PM, Michał Łazowik mlazo...@me.com wrote:
Wiadomość napisana przez Nicolas Vervelle nverve...@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
Hi,
It could mean that, but of course it is actually introduced to prevent
the German community from deactivating the Media Viewer.
User JEissfeldt, removed `mw.config.set(wgMediaViewerOnClick,
false);` from Common.js [0] and is the same person who sets
`protect-level-superprotect`.
I have no
Le 10 août 2014 17:06, James HK jamesin.hongkon...@gmail.com a écrit :
Hi,
It could mean that, but of course it is actually introduced to prevent
the German community from deactivating the Media Viewer.
User JEissfeldt, removed `mw.config.set(wgMediaViewerOnClick,
false);` from Common.js
Il 10/08/2014 15:27, Erik Moeller ha scritto:
Hi folks,
Admins are currently given broad leeway to customize the user
experience for all users, including addition of site-wide JS, CSS,
etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
for many clearly beneficial purposes. In
On 10-08-2014 15:35, svetlana wrote:
This change solves a problem that does not exist.
We either trust sysops, or we don't.
I concur. There are enough admins available to revert bad code
additions. Also, this measure is completely without effect.
*Suppose* I were a rogue admin wanting to
This seems like an unfortunate escalation on the WMF's part. Both sides
have a responsibility to try to work together, but as a practical matter,
the community does not answer to a single person, and the WMF staff do:
it's likely that the first olive branch is going to need to come from the
WMF
Erwin Dokter wrote:
On 10-08-2014 15:35, svetlana wrote:
This change solves a problem that does not exist.
We either trust sysops, or we don't.
I concur. There are enough admins available to revert bad code
additions. Also, this measure is completely without effect.
*Suppose* I were a rogue
hopelessI'd really like to hear Jimbo's opinion on the matter/hopeless
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Superprotect is a feature, the way it will be used must be determined by
consensus, on a theoretical basis there are different possible good uses.
But, anyway, anyone using this feature should be accountable to the
community, like anyone holding any advanced rights.
Vito
Inviato con AquaMail
Op 10 aug. 2014 om 20:12 heeft Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org
het volgende geschreven:
hopelessI'd really like to hear Jimbo's opinion on the matter/hopeless
You should really watch Jimmy's speech at the Wikimania closing session. You
might be surprised.
Cheers!
--
Siebrand
Wow this is pretty depressing, although in today's age I cannot say I'm
surprised. Corporations have always been about controlling their consumers,
and it was really only a matter of time before the WMF fell into that as
well. I wonder whether there's any legitimate justification for all of
this,
After VE fiasco I would had expected to see a less full of itself
Wikimedia. I was wrong.
The Roman Empire strength was its ability to make Romans out of other peoples.
The wiki strenght is making editors and develepers out of netizens.
Rome felt before losing its ability.
Is wiki losing its
Hi,
etc. These are important capabilities of the wiki that have been used
for many clearly beneficial purposes. In the long run, we will want to
apply a code review process to these changes as with any other
deployed code, but for now the system works as it is and we have no
intent to remove
59 matches
Mail list logo
