Hi all, there is already a list of requested features which was distilled out of a survey the MediaWiki Stakeholders' Group conducted a while ago [1]. We are currently looking for funding by companies or other interested parties to get items on this list done. However, to be honest, it's hard to convince someone to fund a feature when it is totally unclear whether it makes its way into the product after development.
This is why I am very delighted to hear about the formation of the Platform Team, as there is now a team to coordinate with. At the very least, the team adds predictability to the development of the core platform, which is something extremely valuable for third party maintainers. I also read it as a statement of the Foundation, that MediaWiki, as a software product, will be taken care of in the forseeable future. This is encouraging and something to build on. I have best hopes that it will become way easier now for external parties to contribute to MediaWiki. The Stakeholders' Group is happy to play its part here. All the best for the new team, Markus User:Mglaser MediaWiki Stakeholders' Group http://mwstake.org [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki_Stakeholders%27_Group/Tasks/Feature_wishlist -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: MediaWiki-l [mailto:mediawiki-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von Derk-Jan Hartman Gesendet: Montag, 3. April 2017 22:53 An: MediaWiki announcements and site admin list <mediawiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Betreff: Re: [MediaWiki-l] Introducing the MediaWiki Platform Team! He brion, Maybe there could some day be a program, where an external company could propose items to place on the roadmap, with the promise that they will deliver a developer to collaborate on that item if the platform chooses to prioritize it. Like a Community tech wishlist in exchange for mutual dedication to the task. DJ 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 _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list To unsubscribe, go to: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
