[Wikitech-l] Fwd: [WikimediaMobile] Notes from discussions about reverts on mobile

[Yuvi Panda]

Might be relevant
-- Forwarded message --
From: "Kenan Wang" 
Date: Apr 5, 2014 4:37 AM
Subject: [WikimediaMobile] Notes from discussions about reverts on mobile
To: "mobile-l" 
Cc: "Moiz Syed" , "Kaity Hammerstein" <
khammerst...@wikimedia.org>

Editors want to be able to patrol edits on pages that they care about.
> Currently they use:
> 1) Watchlist
> 2) Article History
> 3) Recent Changes
>
> The mechanism for “fixing” a problem with an edit is doing a revert.
> Reverting allows you to go back to a revision of the article that existed
> before the change that you want to “fix”. Specifically it populates an edit
> with the content of that previous revision and then you are actually able
> to make any additional changes on top of that old content and then save.
>
> There are two special cases of reverting that are especially useful to
> users:
> 1) Undo - this is when you want to “fix” an edit but there have been edits
> since the problematic edit that were productive. Undo tries to just undo
> that specific edit in question instead of reverting all the way to the
> revision before the edit. The reason to use undo is that sometimes there
> was a problematic edit but since then there have been productive edits.
> Specifically, what undo does is it tries to revert to the revision before
> the problematic edit and then computationally add back in the edits since
> then. Sometimes this isn’t possible. Sometimes it is. When it is possible
> to undo automatically the user gets the revision plus the “productive
> edits” that occurred since the edit being undone, all of that content is
> populated into an edit interface and the user can make any additional edits
> (sometimes necessary to make the article make sense after the undo) and
> then save.
>
> 2) Rollback - this is when you take all of the edits of the last user and
> revert to the revision before those edits. The purpose of this is when
> there is a user that has been committing vandalism you can quickly rollback
> those edits. This is a one step process because it just does the revert and
> saves automatically.
>
> note 1: generally speaking vandalism gets caught quickly and is often the
> most recent or most recent set of edie by a single user i.e. the situation
> that rollback is designed for
>
> note 2: undo occurs on an edit, revert and rollback operate on revisions.
> on desktop the list of edits and the list of revisions is the same
> interface but it may make sense to divide these on mobile. Thus on mobile
> we may have separately a list of revisions (possibly grouped by user) that
> may allow reverts and rollbacks, and a list of edits that allows for unto.
>
> We will likely prioritize revert/rollbacks because that covers the biggest
> use case (vandalism on articles that are changing at a moderate velocity. 
> Also,
> this may have implications for how we display watchlist items: considering
> grouping edits by user, and only displaying most recent edits (i.e. only
> rollback eligible edits)
>
> There a detailed view of revisions in addition to a list view of
> revisions and. We need to understand what goes into a detailed view of a
> revision. Maybe we show the diff to current version because this is what
> would be affected by a revert, actions, username, time, other details.We
> may want to consider changing the interaction of reverts a bit (maybe
> should be 2 click action instead of putting user into edit).
>
> Let me know if I missed anything.
>
> --
>
> Kenan Wang
> Product Manager, Mobile
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> ___
> Mobile-l mailing list
> mobil...@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>
>
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Top Level Design, LLC greedy registrar!

[VP Singh]

Who are you?
Are you a WikimediaN.
Is ray king is working with wikimedia.
True?
wikimedia said that ray is not related to anyone of their organisation.
Clarify
On 4/5/14, Chad  wrote:
> Poor non-Wikipedias won't get shorteners then...
>
> -Chad
> On Apr 5, 2014 3:22 PM, "Steven Walling"  wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Chad  wrote:
>>
>> > There's no point to any of these new gTLDs.
>> >
>>
>> For Wikimedia, there's a lot of potential for use as a good URL shortener
>> (en.wiki/Dog in instead of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog). The fact that Ray
>> is
>> working with us to try and make that kind of thing happen for .wiki is
>> pretty cool, in my book.
>> ___
>> Wikitech-l mailing list
>> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] SpecialPage::getTitle deprecated?!

[Jeroen De Dauw]

Hey,

> Sounds reasonable to me --> https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/124130

\o/ Thanks. This will save extension maintainers quite some hassle.

> Couldn't you just create a MyExtensionNameSpecialPage class like below
and extend that for your special pages instead of regular SpecialPage

You sure can, and I have done such things many times in the past. This
however still does cost effort and is in the end not so nice, esp if it
needs to happen for all extensions that care about it. And in case they
derive from different SpecialPage subclasses, they each have to do it
multiple times.

This all hints as a basic design guideline: only bind to frameworks where
you have to, and avoid putting any domain and application logic in
derivatives of their base classes. That's an entirely general guideline,
yet one often disregarded in MediaWiki extensions.

Cheers

--
Jeroen De Dauw - http://www.bn2vs.com
Software craftsmanship advocate
Evil software architect at Wikimedia Germany
~=[,,_,,]:3
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Top Level Design, LLC greedy registrar!

[Brian Wolff]

>
> Who are you?

The emails have from headers...

> Are you a WikimediaN.

Everyone responding to this thread is a Wikimedian (almost by definition).
Some of the responses are from people who work for the Wikimedia Foundation
(not the same thing as being a Wikimedian), however i am almost certain
they are responding in a personal capacity not an official one. If you are
looking for some sort of official response from WMF legal, you are in the
wrong place.

> Is ray king is working with wikimedia?

Nope. He does not work for WMF.

> wikimedia said that ray is not related to anyone of their organisation.

He does not work for WMF. How to answer that depends on your definition of
related...

--
Bawolff

> Clarify
> On 4/5/14, Chad  wrote:
> > Poor non-Wikipedias won't get shorteners then...
> >
> > -Chad
> > On Apr 5, 2014 3:22 PM, "Steven Walling" 
wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Apr 5, 2014 at 1:51 PM, Chad  wrote:
> >>
> >> > There's no point to any of these new gTLDs.
> >> >
> >>
> >> For Wikimedia, there's a lot of potential for use as a good URL
shortener
> >> (en.wiki/Dog in instead of en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog). The fact that
Ray
> >> is
> >> working with us to try and make that kind of thing happen for .wiki is
> >> pretty cool, in my book.
> >> ___
> >> Wikitech-l mailing list
> >> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> > ___
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

[Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Tomasz W. Kozlowski]

Hi!
I was surprised to see that Twitter is now the preferred method of 
contacting the Wikimedia Foundation, and that it is much more effective 
than long disputes and discussions on mailing lists, Bugzilla and wiki 
pages.


Indeed, it is so effective that it leads to the WMF clearly preferring 
un-free fonts over their free equivalents; something that, I believe, 
participants of this very mailing lists agreed /not/ to do.


FYI: .

Tomasz

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Top Level Design, LLC greedy registrar!

[Jeremy Baron]

On Apr 6, 2014 12:47 PM, "Brian Wolff"  wrote:
> > Is ray king is working with wikimedia?
>
> Nope. He does not work for WMF.

He doesn't work for WMF but the answer for "is working with Wikimedia?" is
"Yes, he is."

-Jeremy
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Shorter URLs

[MZMcBride]

Daniel Norton wrote:
>On Apr 5, 2014, at 6:31 PM, Antoine Musso  wrote:
>> What is the point of having shorter URLs anyway?
>
>Here are the related references:
>
> - https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/URL_shortener
> - https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=38863
> - https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Extension_talk:ShortUrl/UI

I'm beginning to think expanding ShortUrl-type syntax (i.e.,
en.wikipedia.org/s/xr32) is a reasonable compromise position here. It
keeps Wikimedia (and MediaWiki) out of the TLD insanity while providing
shorter URLs to those who want them.

But... "en.wikipedia.org" is still somewhat lengthy. I happen to regularly
use enwp.org as a shortcut for "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/"; when
browsing the Internet (not in public writing). And it seems w.org is now
redirecting to wordpress.org, sigh.

MZMcBride



___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Shorter URLs

[Daniel Norton]

On Apr 6, 2014, at 12:08 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> en.wikipedia.org/s/xr32

Hmm, I presume that you were just tossing out a random URL, but that “/s/” path 
seems to be configured with some special purpose, sending a 301 redirect 
regardless of the remainder of the path. Is that documented somewhere? (I would 
expect a 404.)

--
Daniel

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Shorter URLs

[Jeremy Baron]

On Apr 6, 2014 1:53 PM, "Daniel Norton"  wrote:
> sending a 301 redirect regardless of the remainder of the path. Is that
documented somewhere? (I would expect a 404.)

The apache conf is in a public git repo. (not getting the URL for you atm
because I'm writing from a phone. should be operations/apache-config in
gerrit)

See also https://mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ShortUrl

-Jeremy
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Andre Klapper]

On Sun, 2014-04-06 at 18:52 +0200, Tomasz W. Kozlowski wrote:
> Hi!
> I was surprised to see that Twitter is now the preferred method of 
> contacting the Wikimedia Foundation, and that it is much more effective 
> than long disputes and discussions on mailing lists, Bugzilla and wiki 
> pages.

The related ticket (see last comments explaining some stuff) is
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63512 . Can't judge the
"effectiveness" though. :)

andre
-- 
Andre Klapper | Wikimedia Bugwrangler
http://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/


___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

[Wikitech-l] PHP 5.5.11 is released

[Thomas Gries]

MediaWiki developers:
http://www.php.net/archive/2014.php#id2014-04-02-1 (02 Apr 2014):

The PHP development team announces the immediate availability of PHP 
5.5.11.
Several bugs were fixed in this release, some bundled libraries updated 
and a security issue has been fixed :

CVE-2013-7345. We recommend all PHP 5.5 users to upgrade to this version.

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[David Gerard]

On 6 April 2014 17:52, Tomasz W. Kozlowski  wrote:

> I was surprised to see that Twitter is now the preferred method of
> contacting the Wikimedia Foundation, and that it is much more effective than
> long disputes and discussions on mailing lists, Bugzilla and wiki pages.
> Indeed, it is so effective that it leads to the WMF clearly preferring
> un-free fonts over their free equivalents; something that, I believe,
> participants of this very mailing lists agreed /not/ to do.


I originally went "what on earth" too, then I went to the bug and
looked at the samples. Here's how the previous font stack rendered in
Chrome on Windows without Cleartype on:

http://i.imgur.com/9QD1ujH.png

That's ... pretty broken.


- d.

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Shorter URLs

[MZMcBride]

Daniel Norton wrote:
>On Apr 6, 2014, at 12:08 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
>> en.wikipedia.org/s/xr32
>
>Hmm, I presume that you were just tossing out a random URL, but that
>“/s/” path seems to be configured with some special purpose, sending a
>301 redirect regardless of the remainder of the path. Is that documented
>somewhere? (I would expect a 404.)

The ShortUrl MediaWiki extension is active on some Wikimedia wikis. As
Jeremy says, it has associated Apache configuration to support even
shorter URLs. Example: . I was suggesting
possibly (properly) expanding this functionality to additional Wikimedia
wikis. The current /s/ behavior on wikis where ShortUrl is not installed
is just a byproduct of shared Apache configuration between the domains
(you can search for "/s/" in operations/apache-config/main.conf):
.

MZMcBride



___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Antoine Musso]

Le 06/04/2014 21:11, David Gerard a écrit :
> I originally went "what on earth" too, then I went to the bug and
> looked at the samples. Here's how the previous font stack rendered in
> Chrome on Windows without Cleartype on:
> 
> http://i.imgur.com/9QD1ujH.png

Those crazy free fonts is what make me abandon Linux distributions as a
desktop.  I was tired of fighting with fonts :-D

-- 
Antoine "hashar" Musso


___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Steven Walling]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 12:11 PM, David Gerard  wrote:

> I originally went "what on earth" too, then I went to the bug and
> looked at the samples. Here's how the previous font stack rendered in
> Chrome on Windows without Cleartype on:
>
> http://i.imgur.com/9QD1ujH.png
>
> That's ... pretty broken.
>

Yes.

For the record: Jon talked to one person via Twitter, which is why Tomasz
is complaining about. We also got a *much* larger and more detailed stream
of complaints via on-wiki discussion forums, and other sites like Reddit
where users are discussing the change. Hence the report in Bugzilla. The
idea that we're just responding to the bug based on one report via Twitter
is untrue and absurd.

Steven
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Shorter URLs

[Daniel Norton]

On Apr 6, 2014, at 12:57 PM, Jeremy Baron  wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2014 1:53 PM, "Daniel Norton"  wrote:
>> sending a 301 redirect regardless of the remainder of the path. Is that
> documented somewhere? (I would expect a 404.)
> 
> The apache conf is in a public git repo. (not getting the URL for you atm
> because I'm writing from a phone. should be operations/apache-config in
> gerrit)
> 
> See also https://mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ShortUrl


Yeah, it's in that repo and I found the changeset, but there's no explanation 
or bug #, just a comment "Special:ShortURL redirect RT-2121". The 
Extension:ShortUrl is not enabled on those servers, so I still expect a 404. 
Hmmm. No biggie, but it seems an undocumented anomaly. Perhaps leftover crud?

Changeset: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/16742

--
Daniel

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Shorter URLs

[Daniel Norton]

On Apr 6, 2014, at 2:42 PM, MZMcBride  wrote:
> The current /s/ behavior on wikis where ShortUrl is not installed
> is just a byproduct of shared Apache configuration between the domains

Oh, I see. Okay.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Tomasz W . Kozlowski]

Steven Walling writes:

> The
> idea that we're just responding to the bug based on one report via Twitter
> is untrue and absurd.

You are responding to the bug based on reports that come from outside the 
Wikimedia universe — and to say otherwise is untrue and absurd in itself.

You saw the feedback, Steven, with your own eyes, in January of this year: it 
was submitted by Wikipedian Patrick87 on January 8 at 
.

You had almost three full months to deal with the problem, and yet you are 
only responding to it when people pointed it out to you on Twitter, Reddit, 
Quora, and wherever else.

/If/ you value feedback from Wikipedians, why don't you act on it?

Tomasz



___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Shorter URLs

[Daniel Friesen]

On 2014-04-06, 3:01 PM, Daniel Norton wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2014, at 12:57 PM, Jeremy Baron  wrote:
>> On Apr 6, 2014 1:53 PM, "Daniel Norton"  wrote:
>>> sending a 301 redirect regardless of the remainder of the path. Is that
>> documented somewhere? (I would expect a 404.)
>>
>> The apache conf is in a public git repo. (not getting the URL for you atm
>> because I'm writing from a phone. should be operations/apache-config in
>> gerrit)
>>
>> See also https://mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ShortUrl
>
> Yeah, it's in that repo and I found the changeset, but there's no explanation 
> or bug #, just a comment "Special:ShortURL redirect RT-2121". The 
> Extension:ShortUrl is not enabled on those servers, so I still expect a 404. 
> Hmmm. No biggie, but it seems an undocumented anomaly. Perhaps leftover crud?
>
> Changeset: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/16742
>
> --
> Daniel
It's redirected to index.php where PathRouter is supposed to take over
which Ext:ShortUrl hooks into.
If ShortUrl isn't present then MediaWiki's normal handling of urls will
continue.

MediaWiki doesn't have native 404 handling and any unknown URL is
considered to be the main page.

Never finished the changeset fixing that (implementing native 404 handling).

~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/]


___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Steven Walling]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski
wrote:

> You are responding to the bug based on reports that come from outside the
> Wikimedia universe -- and to say otherwise is untrue and absurd in itself.
>
> You saw the feedback, Steven, with your own eyes, in January of this year:
> it
> was submitted by Wikipedian Patrick87 on January 8 at
> <
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Typography_refresh/Archive_2#Default_sys
>
> tem_fonts_should_be_given_preference_over_free_fonts_.28especially_on_Windows
> .29>.
>
> You had almost three full months to deal with the problem, and yet you are
> only responding to it when people pointed it out to you on Twitter, Reddit,
> Quora, and wherever else.
>
> /If/ you value feedback from Wikipedians, why don't you act on it?
>

Tomasz,

We should be having this conversation in Bugzilla. I replied to this issue
at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63512#c29

TL;DR: one user saying they chose to download the fonts in question is not
the same thing as a report that a significant minority might have them.

On the general point: you and others seem to be simultaneously angry that
we tried a version without a freely-licensed font *and* that we have tried
versions which did have FOSS fonts, but that had unexpected bugs for some
Windows users. Which is it? Or is that you're just looking for an excuse to
be mad and cause a fuss because we changed the typography at all? It sounds
to me like it's the latter.

New software updates that reach this widely always have issues that come up
for unexpected edge cases. The preexisting defaults have been around a long
time, and gone through much bug fixing and tweaking based on user feedback
across wikis. The same will be necessary for the new typography as well.

Steven
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Brian Wolff]

> >
> > You had almost three full months to deal with the problem, and yet you
are
> > only responding to it when people pointed it out to you on Twitter,
Reddit,
> > Quora, and wherever else.
> >
> > /If/ you value feedback from Wikipedians, why don't you act on it?
> >
>
> Tomasz,
>
> We should be having this conversation in Bugzilla. I replied to this issue
> at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63512#c29
>

Odder is raising a concern about how feedback is handled, not the specific
feedback itself. I dont know if this thread is the appropriate venue, or if
it was raised in the best way, but the bug is definitely not the correct
place for such meta discussions. The bug should be about fixing the
technical issue only (in theory anyways. Its already pretty offtopic)

--bawolff
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Tomasz W . Kozlowski]

Steven Walling writes:

> On the general point: you and others seem to be simultaneously angry that
> we tried a version without a freely-licensed font *and* that we have tried
> versions which did have FOSS fonts, but that had unexpected bugs for some
> Windows users. Which is it? Or is that you're just looking for an excuse 
to
> be mad and cause a fuss because we changed the typography at all? It 
sounds
> to me like it's the latter.

You are clueless, kind sir, so let me get some things straight.

1. I am deeply uncomfortable with the fact that you are choosing un-free 
fonts over free ones.
2. I am deeply uncomfortable with the fact that you decided not to respect 
the consensus /not/ to choose non-free fonts — such as Arial and Helvetica — 
over free fonts; a discussion which I only read, but which, as far as I 
remember, saw participation from yourself, Quim, Greg, and some other 
people.

As for your suggestion that I'm only looking to make a fuss, here's some 
basic facts for you to ponder.

A. /I/ pointed it out to Greg and to you on IRC that deploying Typography 
Refresh to all wikis on the same day (March 28) was a bad idea, and that it 
would be better to roll it out with MediaWiki 1.23wmf21, as it would give 
time to inform the community (as well as to push some last-minute fixes).
B. /I/ was the one who added information about Typography Refresh to the 
last two issues of Tech News, therefore delivering information about it to 
almost 250 individual subscribers and several community pages & village 
pumps.

Now, don't you think that if I wanted to make a fuss about the change:

I. I would have supported your plan to deploy it to all wikis at the same 
time, so as to ensure maximum community drama, chaos and anger;
II. I would have kept the community in the dark, to ensure even more drama & 
vitriol coming your way?

I'm used to you suggesting that I fabricate stuff, so if you want to think 
that I'm part of some bad faith conspiracy to mean you harm in this case, 
then that's fine; just keep in mind that other people might not be as 
welcoming.

Tomasz


___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Brian Wolff]

>
> You are clueless, kind sir, so let me get some things straight.

Please keep things civil on list.

--bawolff
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Steven Walling]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski
wrote:

1. I am deeply uncomfortable with the fact that you are choosing un-free
> fonts over free ones.
> 2. I am deeply uncomfortable with the fact that you decided not to respect
> the consensus /not/ to choose non-free fonts -- such as Arial and Helvetica
> --
> over free fonts; a discussion which I only read, but which, as far as I
> remember, saw participation from yourself, Quim, Greg, and some other
> people.
>

We've tried the alternative and it's untenable according to the feedback
we're getting. I wish it wasn't. I'd rather put free fonts first in the
stack, if they actually work for users. Twice now we've tried putting
different freely-licensed fonts first. Both times, Windows users who had
them have told us they either merely disliked them or they have caused
unacceptably poor rendering, particularly for those without font smoothing.
There simply is not widely-available font that meets all our needs while
also being freely-licensed. The compromise is either to deliver a
freely-licensed webfont to all users (which we're not going to do right
now, though it's the ideal IMO) or to specify the best fonts users already
have on their system free or not, which accomplish the consistency and
legibility we're looking for. This is just the reality. Whether or not the
CSS/LESS declares them explicitly or not, non-free fonts are what most
users have already and want to use, because they actually work. This is
true whether we set a more specific stack than "sans-serif" or not.


> As for your suggestion that I'm only looking to make a fuss, here's some
> basic facts for you to ponder.
>
> A. /I/ pointed it out to Greg and to you on IRC that deploying Typography
> Refresh to all wikis on the same day (March 28) was a bad idea, and that it
> would be better to roll it out with MediaWiki 1.23wmf21, as it would give
> time to inform the community (as well as to push some last-minute fixes).
>

Delaying release to anticipate bugs that have not yet been reported by
anyone makes no sense. At the time of release there were only four bugs
open related to VectorBeta as an extension, none of which could have told
us about the issue. How could last minute fixes be pushed for a bug no one
had actually reported yet?
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[wctaiwan]

On 6 April 2014 19:19, Steven Walling  wrote:
> Twice now we've tried putting
> different freely-licensed fonts first. Both times, Windows users who had
> them have told us they either merely disliked them or they have caused
> unacceptably poor rendering, particularly for those without font smoothing.

I don't think we should prioritise users with font smoothing disabled.
ClearType has been available since at least Windows XP. If there are
legibility issues, we should probably fix it; but if it merely looks
ugly, the solution is for the users to enable font smoothing if they
want prettier font rendering.

wctaiwan

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[David Gerard]

On 7 April 2014 00:16, Brian Wolff  wrote:

>> You are clueless, kind sir, so let me get some things straight.

> Please keep things civil on list.


This was in response to "Or is that you're just looking for an excuse
to be mad and cause a fuss because we changed the typography at all?
It sounds to me like it's the latter."


- d.

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Brian Wolff]

On 4/6/14, David Gerard  wrote:
> On 7 April 2014 00:16, Brian Wolff  wrote:
>
>>> You are clueless, kind sir, so let me get some things straight.
>
>> Please keep things civil on list.
>
>
> This was in response to "Or is that you're just looking for an excuse
> to be mad and cause a fuss because we changed the typography at all?
> It sounds to me like it's the latter."
>
>
> - d.
>
> ___
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

I'd appreciate it if both sides avoided inflammatory language.
Remember folks, criticize the code (or issue in question as the case
may be), not the people.

--bawolff

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Steven Walling]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 4:24 PM, wctaiwan  wrote:

> I don't think we should prioritise users with font smoothing disabled.
> ClearType has been available since at least Windows XP. If there are
> legibility issues, we should probably fix it; but if it merely looks
> ugly, the solution is for the users to enable font smoothing if they
> want prettier font rendering.
>

I too was surprised at how many users are A) on XP with ClearType off,
which is the default there or B) turn font smoothing off intentionally.

I should note that by fixing this bug we won't be changing the appearance
for users on most platforms, except those on Windows who have these two
fonts (Arimo, Liberation Sans), so we're not degrading the quality of font
rendering just to optimize for those without smoothing.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Forget mailing lists and on-wiki discussions; Twitter's the place!

[Zack Weinberg]

On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 8:39 PM, Steven Walling  wrote:
>
> I too was surprised at how many users are A) on XP with ClearType off,
> which is the default there or B) turn font smoothing off intentionally.

I have no comment on any of the rest of this, but with my Firefox dev
hat on, we've been through several cycles of being told in no
uncertain terms that a vocal minority of our userbase _hates_ what
ClearType does to the visual appearance of text, and will stop at
nothing to suppress it.  (That the vast majority of fonts do not have
the extra hinting required to look good with ClearType off matters not
to them; these people generally also wish to force all websites to use
their preferred fonts.  Possibly I should say preferred *font*.)

zw

___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

[Wikitech-l] Bugzilla Weekly Report

[reporter]

MediaWiki Bugzilla Report for March 31, 2014 - April 07, 2014

Status changes this week

Reports changed/set to UNCONFIRMED:  1 
Reports changed/set to NEW:  19
Reports changed/set to ASSIGNED   :  34
Reports changed/set to REOPENED   :  4 
Reports changed/set to PATCH_TO_RE:  81
Reports changed/set to RESOLVED   :  231   
Reports changed/set to VERIFIED   :  24

Total reports still open  : 14277 
Total bugs still open : 8450  
Total non-lowest prio. bugs still open: 8233  
Total enhancements still open : 5827  

Reports created this week: 315   

Resolutions for the week:

Reports marked FIXED :  179   
Reports marked DUPLICATE :  20
Reports marked INVALID   :  12
Reports marked WORKSFORME:  13
Reports marked WONTFIX   :  13

Specific Product/Component Resolutions & User Metrics 

Created reports per component

MediaWiki extensions  WikidataRepo  34  
  
VisualEditor  Editing Tools 17  
  
Wikimedia Labstools 17  
  
MediaWiki Skin and page rendering   11  
  
Wikimedia Quality Assurance 10  
  

Created reports per product

MediaWiki extensions  97
MediaWiki 51
Wikimedia 36
Wikimedia Labs33
VisualEditor  31

Top 5 bug report closers

hashar [AT] free.fr   25
jforrester [AT] wikimedia.org 17
jrobson [AT] wikimedia.org12
marc [AT] uberbox.org 12
matma.rex [AT] gmail.com  11


Most urgent open issues

Product   | Component | BugID | Priority  | LastChange | Assignee   
  | Summary  
--
MediaWiki | Database  | 32551 | Highest   | 2014-04-06 | 
gdubuc[AT]wikimedia. | Descriptionless files (Missing page_l

MediaWiki | Skin and page | 63351 | Highest   | 2014-04-04 | 
wikibugs-l[AT]lists. | Document "Typography refresh/update" 

MediaWiki | Special pages | 63249 | Highest   | 2014-03-29 | 
wikibugs-l[AT]lists. | Uncacheable RecentChanges feed, outli

MediaWiki ext | CirrusSearch  | 62077 | Highest   | 2014-04-04 | 
wikibugs-l[AT]lists. | CirrusSearch:  Add monitoring for slo

MediaWiki ext | Flow  | 58016 | Highest   | 2014-04-04 | 
wikibugs-l[AT]lists. | Flow: Suppression redacts the wrong u

MediaWiki ext | OAuth | 57336 | Highest   | 2014-04-03 | 
wikibugs-l[AT]lists. | Make metawiki the central OAuth wiki 

MediaWiki ext | WikidataRepo  | 63228 | Highest   | 2014-03-28 | 
wikidata-bugs[AT]lis | prevent import of items  

MediaWiki ext | WikidataRepo  | 63224 | Highest   | 2014-04-01 | 
wikidata-bugs[AT]lis | review backend part of entity suggest

MediaWiki ext | WikidataRepo  | 63223 | Highest   | 2014-04-01 | 
wikidata-bugs[AT]lis | review frontend part of entity sugges

MediaWiki ext | WikidataRepo  | 52385 | Highest   | 2014-04-03 | 
wikidata-bugs[AT]lis | Query by one property and one value (

MediaWiki ext | WikidataRepo  | 63255 | Highest   | 2014-04-06 | 
wikidata-bugs[AT]lis | check standard spam prevention featur

Wikimedia | Mailing lists | 59731 | Highest   | 2014-04-04 | 
wikibugs-l[AT]lists. | mailman emails taking long time for d


___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l