Great to know. I am looking forward at a team to whom volunteer devs can ask to review their patchsets to mediawiki-core and its extensions without an indefinite ETA! (probably I read the team goals wrong).
Thanks, Tony Thomas <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:01tonythomas> On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 8:35 PM, Brion Vibber <bvib...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > We'll be primarily working on things for Wikimedia -- that's what people > donate to WMF to support -- but part of what we want to do is to provide a > clearer development roadmap which we expect to be helpful to third-party > users, and clearer points of contact for getting things done. > > > At this time there are no plans I'm aware of for providing explicit > third-party support contracting from within WMF (as in, paying people to > provide custom installation support, custom development, prioritization of > custom bug fixes, or explicitly lobbying to get particular custom > development or ideas merged into core that aren't focused on Wikimedia > needs). I think this would be great to do, but it's just not on the table > for now. > > I would strongly encourage any interested and enterprising people who might > wish to perform such work to organize themselves to provide such custom > services directly to people who need them and work with us on that roadmap > & future core development. > > -- brion > > > > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:28 AM, Jasmine Smith <jassmit...@outlook.com> > wrote: > > > Out of interest, will this 'platform team' only work to serve Wikimedia > or > > the wider MediaWiki user community? > > > > One of my vices with the WMF/mediawiki is that development is to benefit > > the WMF. > > > > The WMF uses a number of extensions which are highly sought after by > those > > wanting to set up their own wikis (SecurePoll, CentralAuth, Site Matrix, > > etc) but provides no support for them, says they are only for WMF but > > released anyway, and unless you know PHP, those extensions are locked > off. > > > > I don't feel like the WMFs goal to openly share knowledge applies in > these > > cases, and development of MediaWiki isn't to support the wider community > of > > users. > > > > > On 3 Apr 2017, at 02:16 pm, "Chad" <innocentkil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 12:35 AM Jeroen De Dauw <jeroended...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> This makes it sound like the MediaWiki codebase is pretty well > designed. > > >> That is in stark contrast to my view, which is that it is a typical > big > > >> ball of mud with serious pervasive issues too numerous to list. So I'm > > >> curious how you arrived at your view. > > > As opposed to Wikibase, which is a collection of well-designed > components > > > which nobody (outside of its development team) knows how they are held > > > together to form a cohesive product. My guess has always been magic > > and/or > > > prayers. > > > > > > Something something glass houses & stones. > > > > > > -Chad > > > _______________________________________________ > > > MediaWiki-l mailing list > > > To unsubscribe, go to: > > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > > MediaWiki-l mailing list > > To unsubscribe, go to: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l > > > _______________________________________________ > MediaWiki-l mailing list > To unsubscribe, go to: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l > _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list To unsubscribe, go to: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
