[Cloud] Re: Proposing a Tool sweep
hello wikimedians, excuse for wading into this issue, frankly i couldnt sit idle i will add couple of words about license. i am always interested in opensource licenses. i will write about afdstats & twinkle (a) i did check license of afdstats given at Category:Toolforge tools [1] i choose it because it is first tool. there is no license mentioned at wikitech page [2] github repo [3] does not have license also (b) twinkle [i was plainly curious] only select2 [4] license is given on twinkle github page [5] there is no word about contributors license on contributors page [6] (i expected some kind of license for submitting prs) [1] https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Toolforge_tools [2] https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tool:Afdstats [3] https://github.com/enterprisey/afdstats [4] https://github.com/select2/select2 [5] https://github.com/wikimedia-gadgets/twinkle [6] https://github.com/wikimedia-gadgets/twinkle/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md regards, jindam, vani Gnus/5.13 Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) toots: @jindam_vani@mastodon.world gnome: w.wiki/67VT ___ Cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.wikimedia.org List information: https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/cloud.lists.wikimedia.org/
[Cloud] Re: Proposing a Tool sweep
It's a recurring problem. Tool Y becomes popular, then becomes unmaintained. Other developers/WMCS/Toolforge roots/Standards Committee investigate, and find that everything is All Rights Reserved. Then the bot task/tool is dead until someone rewrites it, often years later. Happened most recently with the SanFranBan of جار الله / JarBot, but that's definitely not an isolated incident. ACN On Thu, Dec 29, 2022 at 11:41 Maarten Dammers wrote: > Hi Kunal, > > Can you explain here and/or on > https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Portal:Toolforge/Tool_sweep why you > want to do this? > > Maarten > > On 29-12-2022 10:02, Kunal Mehta wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > > > tl;dr: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Portal:Toolforge/Tool_sweep > > > > It has been nearly a decade since Toolforge came online. Since then, > > there have a been a lot of improvements to tool infrastructure, but > > many tools have not yet caught up. For example, new tools are required > > to have metadata in toolsadmin, and unused tools can now be > > archived/deleted. > > > > I am proposing that we "sweep" through all tools, checking each one for: > > * Indicating a OSI-approved license in the source code/metadata > > * Having source code published somewhere > > * Not loading external resources (for web applications) > > * Having tool information and metadata in Toolsadmin or Toolhub > > > > This is explained further on the wiki page, with proposed remediation > > steps. > > > > There are roughly ~3,200 tools, if we split it up into batches by > > month, it's about 250 tools per month. Depending on how many people > > are interested sweeping, it could be doable :) ...or it might take > > multiple years to clear through. > > > > Ultimately the goal is to support tool maintainers with bringing their > > tools up to standard rather than criticizing them for not doing so. > > > > If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the > > wiki page :) I would like to kick this off in the first week of January. > > > > Please let me know if you have any concerns, questions or suggestions. > > > > Thanks, > > -- Kunal / Legoktm > > ___ > > Cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.wikimedia.org > > List information: > > https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/cloud.lists.wikimedia.org/ > ___ > Cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.wikimedia.org > List information: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/cloud.lists.wikimedia.org/ > -- AntiCompositeNumber (he/him) ___ Cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.wikimedia.org List information: https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/cloud.lists.wikimedia.org/
[Cloud] Re: Proposing a Tool sweep
Hi Kunal, Can you explain here and/or on https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Portal:Toolforge/Tool_sweep why you want to do this? Maarten On 29-12-2022 10:02, Kunal Mehta wrote: Hi everyone, tl;dr: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Portal:Toolforge/Tool_sweep It has been nearly a decade since Toolforge came online. Since then, there have a been a lot of improvements to tool infrastructure, but many tools have not yet caught up. For example, new tools are required to have metadata in toolsadmin, and unused tools can now be archived/deleted. I am proposing that we "sweep" through all tools, checking each one for: * Indicating a OSI-approved license in the source code/metadata * Having source code published somewhere * Not loading external resources (for web applications) * Having tool information and metadata in Toolsadmin or Toolhub This is explained further on the wiki page, with proposed remediation steps. There are roughly ~3,200 tools, if we split it up into batches by month, it's about 250 tools per month. Depending on how many people are interested sweeping, it could be doable :) ...or it might take multiple years to clear through. Ultimately the goal is to support tool maintainers with bringing their tools up to standard rather than criticizing them for not doing so. If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the wiki page :) I would like to kick this off in the first week of January. Please let me know if you have any concerns, questions or suggestions. Thanks, -- Kunal / Legoktm ___ Cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.wikimedia.org List information: https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/cloud.lists.wikimedia.org/ ___ Cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.wikimedia.org List information: https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/cloud.lists.wikimedia.org/
[Cloud] Re: Proposing a Tool sweep
It seems like all of those checks could be automated. Have we reached the point where "source code published somewhere" is synonymous with "in a publicly accessible git repo"? > On Dec 29, 2022, at 4:02 AM, Kunal Mehta wrote: > > Hi everyone, > > tl;dr: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Portal:Toolforge/Tool_sweep > > It has been nearly a decade since Toolforge came online. Since then, there > have a been a lot of improvements to tool infrastructure, but many tools have > not yet caught up. For example, new tools are required to have metadata in > toolsadmin, and unused tools can now be archived/deleted. > > I am proposing that we "sweep" through all tools, checking each one for: > * Indicating a OSI-approved license in the source code/metadata > * Having source code published somewhere > * Not loading external resources (for web applications) > * Having tool information and metadata in Toolsadmin or Toolhub > > This is explained further on the wiki page, with proposed remediation steps. > > There are roughly ~3,200 tools, if we split it up into batches by month, it's > about 250 tools per month. Depending on how many people are interested > sweeping, it could be doable :) ...or it might take multiple years to clear > through. > > Ultimately the goal is to support tool maintainers with bringing their tools > up to standard rather than criticizing them for not doing so. > > If you're interested in participating, please add your name to the wiki page > :) I would like to kick this off in the first week of January. > > Please let me know if you have any concerns, questions or suggestions. > > Thanks, > -- Kunal / Legoktm > ___ > Cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.wikimedia.org > List information: > https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/cloud.lists.wikimedia.org/ > ___ Cloud mailing list -- cloud@lists.wikimedia.org List information: https://lists.wikimedia.org/postorius/lists/cloud.lists.wikimedia.org/
