Should the Config and GlobalConfig classes and the associated
RequestContext methods be reverted from 1.23 as an incomplete feature?
As far as I can tell, it is not yet used anywhere, so reverting it
should be easy.
getConfig() was added to IContextSource in 101a2a160b05[1]. Then
the method was ch
I'd suggest a revert from the branch, yes.
--
View this message in context:
http://wikimedia.7.x6.nabble.com/Config-class-and-1-23-tp5026223p5026236.html
Sent from the Wikipedia Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
Wikitech-l mailing li
I agree. I was going to attempt to fix the newest patch, but until the
semester ends I won't have a lot of time (and it seems neither does the
current patch owner).
*-- *
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2016
Major in Computer Science
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Aaro
Hey,
Is there some kind of description of the responsibility of the context
source stuff anywhere? And the design vision behind it? I find the whole
thing extremely dubious, as it appears to try make you bind to a whole
group of rather scary classes. Perhaps I am missing something?
Cheers
--
Jer
On 04/18/2014 04:40 AM, Kevin Israel wrote:
Should the Config and GlobalConfig classes and the associated
RequestContext methods be reverted from 1.23 as an incomplete feature?
As far as I can tell, it is not yet used anywhere, so reverting it
should be easy.
The implementation in core right no
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 7:17 PM, Legoktm wrote:
> I would like to have Config make it into 1.23, mainly since it's an LTS,
> which would allow more extensions to take advantage of it without breaking
> backwards-compatability.
I don't mind getting the Config class into 1.23. However, at this mom
On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Tyler Romeo wrote:
> I'd recommend reverting the merged Config patch, and then backporting
> Legoktm's patch when it's finished and merged.
>
>
That'd be messy in the history. Let's just wait a few days or
so and see what comes of the patch. There's no rush...the
On 04/18/2014 05:35 PM, Jeroen De Dauw wrote:
> Hey,
>
> Is there some kind of description of the responsibility of the context
> source stuff anywhere? And the design vision behind it? I find the whole
> thing extremely dubious, as it appears to try make you bind to a whole
> group of rather scar
On 4/29/14, 1:56 PM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
Looks like we are still working on merging the "Make abstract Config
class truly implementation-agnostic" changeset.[0]
[0] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/109850/
The patch currently has three +1's (including myself) and one -1; it's
just
On 5/23/14, 9:26 PM, Legoktm wrote:
On 4/29/14, 1:56 PM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
Looks like we are still working on merging the "Make abstract Config
class truly implementation-agnostic" changeset.[0]
[0] https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/109850/
The patch currently has three +1's (incl
10 matches
Mail list logo
