Hi Faidon,
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 1:53 PM, Faidon Liambotis
wrote:
> If we have spare budget for the FY, a good start, I think, would be
> (properly) implementing https://secure.phabricator.com/T5000, by
>
I have reflected your request at
I wouldn't base any data analysis on the #Phabricator-Upstream workboard.
Let's look at the tasks themselves.
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/query/Ou8pP.fE9ufA/#R shows 131
tasks with #Phabricator-Upstream tag and status Resolved. In almost every
Phabricator update we are getting
On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 4:42 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
wrote:
>> That said, I think we should be careful with our assumptions about how
>> much influence we can buy with the money we have.
>
> Sure. Let's not make assumptions at all then: what makes someone think that
>
> That said, I think we should be careful with our assumptions about how
> much influence we can buy with the money we have.
Sure. Let's not make assumptions at all then: what makes someone think
that calendar is amenable to WMF-mandated development? Already one year
ago, I proposed that
On 2016-05-16 21:03, Joel Aufrecht wrote:
- what is the difference is between Wikimedia Requests and Upstreamed?
Presumably Upstreamed just means that a task about it has been filed at
https://secure.phabricator.com/ and there's a link to it on our task.
--
Bartosz Dziewoński
As I understand it,
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/phabricator-upstream/ is supposed to
represent the complete, current list of WMF needs for Phabricator. So any
discussion in this list should, in order to be re-usable in the future and
fully transparent, be reflected in that list via, at
> If we're going to be investing money into improving Phabricator upstream...
It's really good that we're having a healthy debate about the
usability of Phabricator. I've enjoyed working with Phab a lot more
than the tools that it has replaced, but it is by no means perfect.
We have a role to
It would also be nice to see spare funds spent on finishing the Bugzilla ->
Phabricator conversion properly (it would build trust in our ability to
pull of the other proposed transitions properly), see T687 (and other
subtasks of T850). Although that would probably require local development,
not
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 10:59:40PM +0200, Andre Klapper wrote:
> On Sat, 2016-05-14 at 20:51 +0200, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > If we're going to be investing money into improving Phabricator
> > upstream, I think we should start with making Differential usable
> > (i.e. a suitable replacement for
On Sat, 2016-05-14 at 20:51 +0200, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> If we're going to be investing money into improving Phabricator
> upstream, I think we should start with making Differential usable
> (i.e. a suitable replacement for Gerrit)
If you have *specific* issues, please point them out by linking
If we're going to be investing money into improving Phabricator
upstream, I think we should start with making Differential usable (i.e.
a suitable replacement for Gerrit)
Il 13/05/2016 21:36, Quim Gil ha scritto:
Annoyed by the difficulties of tracking events in the Wikimedia tech
community?
Hi,
On 05/13/2016 12:36 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
> The Technical Collaboration team has some budget that we could use to fund
> the Phabricator maintainers to prioritize some improvements in their
> Calendar. If you think this is a bad idea and/or you have a better one,
> please discuss in the task
Annoyed by the difficulties of tracking events in the Wikimedia tech
community? Or by the difficulties of announcing events in an effective way?
Check this out:
Consolidate the many tech events calendars in Phabricator's calendar
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T1035
The hypothesis is that it
13 matches
Mail list logo