Hi, in the introduction to the Help page for the Flagged Reviews extension,
it says the following:
It is possible, however, to configure pages so that only revisions that are
flagged to a certain level are visible when the page is viewed by readers
Le 13/08/12 19:18, Daniel Friesen a écrit :
So I spent a night implementing a fully featured notification bubble
system. Something that should work for watchlists, VisualEditor, and
perhaps some other things like LQT, and perhaps anything we want to
start making more dynamic. Same goes for
Tomasz Ganicz, 27/08/2012 13:27:
Detailed information regarding Wikimedia Foundation's server's and
network can be found here:
http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/
Which is completely useless for any kind of high-level information, in
particular [[Server roles]] which is dead and has no
While this isn't a wikimedia talk, this might have some information that would
be helpful: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6r4qHVawVNQ
Matthew Bowker
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Matthewrbowker
On Aug 27, 2012, at 5:47 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
Tomasz Ganicz,
Dear all,
Over the past few months, we have moved the configuration of
translatewiki.net over to the translatewiki repository in
Git/Gerrit[1,2]. Recently we also added maintenance scripts to that.
So in case you're wondering how the magic of supporting the
localisation of 20 or so open source
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote:
2012/8/23 Tilman Bayer tba...@wikimedia.org:
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 4:27 AM, Strainu strain...@gmail.com wrote:
...
You guys (and by that I mean anybody who doesn't regularly edit a
text-producing project[1], but
Hoi,
I have re-read the Wikipedia article about OpenID and OpenAuth.
OpenAuth while nice in many ways is NOT the same as OpenID. User
authentication is one easy and obvious requirement and I have already said
too much about its need.
It is NOT clear at all to me why OpenAuth should be regarded
On Tue, 2012-08-21 at 15:29 -0700, Ryan Lane wrote:
The really difficult thing here is that every time a bad idea
is WONTFIX'd it makes a community member feel that they are being
ignored. Do it too many times and you have a lot of community members
that feel this way.
My naïve hope is that
OpenID is an identity management system. It allows users to authenticate to
one site using another site as their identity. A use case for this is, for
example, using your Facebook account to log in to Wikipedia. This may be
useful, as it would allow users to more easily register for Wikipedia.
What are you referring to here? The following definitely does NOT work:
#REDIRECT [[Article title#Section name]]
Timwi
It does, kinda: you need to use an underscore in the Section_name, to
reflect the fact that the ID in question has that underscore (and has done
for the past couple of
I have re-read the Wikipedia article about OpenID and OpenAuth.
OpenAuth while nice in many ways is NOT the same as OpenID. User
authentication is one easy and obvious requirement and I have already said
too much about its need.
It is NOT clear at all to me why OpenAuth should be regarded
Bots could also benefit from this greatly.
Indeed. In fact, it could (possibly) even change the way bots are done
altogether. Right now bots are put on separate bot accounts so that if they
are compromised the main user account is still secure (and also so that the
permissions are separated).
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerro...@gmail.com wrote:
Bots could also benefit from this greatly.
Indeed. In fact, it could (possibly) even change the way bots are done
altogether. Right now bots are put on separate bot accounts so that if they
are compromised the main
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 1:04 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerro...@gmail.com wrote:
Indeed. In fact, it could (possibly) even change the way bots are done
altogether. Right now bots are put on separate bot accounts so that if they
are
I don't think that's something we really want to do. Granting bot
permissions hides someone from RecentChanges by default,
which you wouldn't want as a normal user (well you might, but
I don't think communities would).
Indeed. Communities also want separate bot accounts so it's easy to
tell
Hello,
Recently I noticed that keywords in bugzilla get
updated more and more often, mostly with keywords
like patch, patch-need-review, etc.
I am wondering what to do in the following situations
(like https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=39635
for example):
- user A posts a patch
-
Well, with OAuth, it might be possible to mark actions as bot actions.
It would also be possible to revoke just the OAuth key that allows the
bot to operate, thus avoiding blocking the user.
It would still be easier though for an end user to look at a username and see
the bot. The user pages for
It would still be easier though for an end user to look at a username and see
the bot. The user pages for Bots usually include quite a bit of information
on
them as well. Definitely think replacing Bot accounts with OAuth is the wrong
way to go. I like the idea of using it for the
I agree that bot accounts should still be separate, I just wanted to make
the point that, theoretically, since the permissions are separated, you
could do it that way if so desired.
*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com |
Hi,
It's recently come up in some of the Wikidata changes proposed to core to
start using some ORM-like interfaces for accessing this data[0]. Since we
don't use ORM-style access anywhere else in core, I figured it warranted
some wider discussion before we begin introducing the pattern.
Thank you to Sumana for all your hard work, including GSoC administration
and much, much more -- and obviously for starting this thread. This is
exactly the kind of positive community spirit we need!
Also thanks to the admin tools development team (Chris Steipp, Tim
Starling, James Alexander,
From what I can tell, MediaWiki is trying more and more to reduce code
re-use and move toward an easy MVC design, where the models are handled by
ORM, the controllers are either Actions or SpecialPages, and the views are
handled by Skin/Message/HTMLForm. And while ORMTable and FormAction, etc.
are
Hey,
I'm a big fan of the pattern (or at least parts of it), which is the reason
I spend quite some effort getting a generic interface into MediaWiki. This
is the ORMTable class mentioned by Tyler. Documentation of this class,
together with a rationale and some implementation notes can be found
Le 27/08/12 22:53, Chad wrote:
It's recently come up in some of the Wikidata changes proposed to core to
start using some ORM-like interfaces for accessing this data[0]. Since we
don't use ORM-style access anywhere else in core, I figured it warranted
some wider discussion before we begin
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:47 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
nemow...@gmail.com wrote:
http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/
Which is completely useless for any kind of high-level information, in
particular [[Server roles]] which is dead and has no replacement and
On 08/27/2012 04:53 PM, Chad wrote:
Hi,
It's recently come up in some of the Wikidata changes proposed to core to
start using some ORM-like interfaces for accessing this data[0]. Since we
don't use ORM-style access anywhere else in core, I figured it warranted
some wider discussion before we
Thanks the explain in-depth about why storing configuration in articles is
a good thing. Keep up the good work.
On Aug 26, 2012 2:11 PM, akshay chugh chughaksha...@gmail.com wrote:
-1
On Sun, Aug 26, 2012 at 11:34 PM, John Du Hart compwhi...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:40
There are some examples linked from the documentation here:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:ORMTable
Note that these are not clean examples as they contain unrelated code as
well.
And of course this is just one example of how you can go about implementing
an ORM pattern, while this tread is
On 12-08-27 04:10 PM, John Du Hart wrote:
Thanks the explain in-depth about why storing configuration in articles is
a good thing. Keep up the good work.
See this is also unnecessary.
Your original message might have been better stated as
Hey, I love this idea, but is there a reason you
I ran into our coding conventions for creating elements in JS:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Coding_conventions/JavaScript#Creating_elements
var $hello = $('div').text( 'Hello' );
// Not 'div/'
// Not 'div/div'
This looks like some really bad advice.
This dates back to an issue I ran
(Splitting this off from John's critique of ConventionExtension.)
Hi.
MediaWiki has participated in several (Google) Summer of Code iterations now
(https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Summer_of_Code) and I'm wondering how this
partnership program is evaluated.
Whenever this program wraps up at the
Hence, I think we should change our coding conventions to always use `$(
'div /' )`.
+1 for valid XHTML. Considering that bytes are cheap and validity is
good, this seems like a good idea.
I also tried to get an answer about the better between $( 'div
class=a-class /' ) and $( 'div /'
$( 'div' ) is the way to go.
- Trevor
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Mark Holmquist mtrac...@member.fsf.orgwrote:
Hence, I think we should change our coding conventions to always use `$(
'div /' )`.
+1 for valid XHTML. Considering that bytes are cheap and validity is good,
this seems
MZMcBride wrote:
MediaWiki has participated in several (Google) Summer of Code iterations now
(https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Summer_of_Code) and I'm wondering how this
partnership program is evaluated.
After I posted this, Sumana pointed out that MaxSem has done a great
evaluation here:
On Monday, August 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Trevor Parscal wrote:
$( 'div' ) is the way to go.
Yeah. Mark Pilgrim's overview of the sordid history of XHTML is useful
background: http://diveintohtml5.info/past.html
--
Ori Livneh
o...@wikimedia.org
Most software projects fail (for some definition of fail). Even for
highly skilled and highly experienced companies and shops, most software
projects fail. I'm not going to look up the Gartner and Forrester and
Chaos reports this late on a Monday night, but google away.
GSoC is an investment
Daniel Friesen wrote:
I wonder if we should turn this into a special page on MW.org.
I'm not sure about a Special page, but I created a very short page on
MediaWiki.org: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Nightlies.
MZMcBride
___
Wikitech-l mailing
On 08/27/2012 01:59 PM, Marcin Cieslak wrote:
- user A posts a patch
- the bug gets patch, patch-need-review
- user B posts a patch that is different and says
he does not like patch of A
- user B submits change to gerrit
When need-review should be removed?
User B should remove
On 08/27/2012 12:04 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
We need some sort of think tank (well some thing with a better name)
non-profit that people donate to. To have it hire people to crank out
MediaWiki features outside of just the stuff WMF wants.
I'd love to spend 80% of my time cranking out
On Mon, 27 Aug 2012 16:57:52 -0700, Ori Livneh o...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Monday, August 27, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Trevor Parscal wrote:
$( 'div' ) is the way to go.
Yeah. Mark Pilgrim's overview of the sordid history of XHTML is useful
background: http://diveintohtml5.info/past.html
--
Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
On 08/27/2012 12:04 AM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
We need some sort of think tank (well some thing with a better name)
non-profit that people donate to. To have it hire people to crank out
MediaWiki features outside of just the stuff WMF wants.
I'd love to spend 80%
Chris McMahon wrote:
Most software projects fail (for some definition of fail). Even for
highly skilled and highly experienced companies and shops, most software
projects fail. I'm not going to look up the Gartner and Forrester and
Chaos reports this late on a Monday night, but google away.
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/34961
Niklas and Siebrand have already weighed in on this bug back in Mar,
and, indeed, it went away for a while.
Niklas said
We could make it the same as how it is in Special:Logs, removing
the first Username and not the username that is part of the
On Monday, August 27, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Daniel Friesen wrote:
If you don't like the XHTML-ish shortcut that jQuery provides, then our
coding conventions should be to use `$( 'div/div' );`.
Either way $( 'div' ) is NOT something officially supported by jQuery
and makes it easy for
On 28/08/12 09:26, Daniel Friesen wrote:
jQuery does special case attribute-less $( 'div /' ) but this is a
performance enhancement. The fact that $( 'div' ) does not break in
IE7/IE8 is an unintentional side effect of jQuery's lazy support of
special cases like $( 'img' ) where the tag is
A while back[1], I started a discussion about moving tarball maintenance
out of the Foundation. I have spent a little time since then talking to
Sam Reed about what is actually involved, but we're coming up on the 6
month mark since the last release and I need to start doing something if
I'm
See also
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Talk:Git/Workflow/Bugzilla
Best regards,
Helder
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I'd have to see what you are doing to see if rollback is really needed.
--
View this message in context:
http://wikimedia.7.n6.nabble.com/Nested-database-transactions-tp4983700p4984075.html
Sent from the Wikipedia Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
That text should be removed from the help page. Only the current or the
latest reviewed version can be the default. You cannot have pages use the
latest quality version as the default version. This would create a very
confusing interface that takes a mouth full to explain.
Also, it's hard enough
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 4:37 PM, Mark Holmquist mtrac...@member.fsf.org wrote:
I also tried to get an answer about the better between $( 'div
class=a-class /' ) and $( 'div /' ).addClass( 'a-class' ), but
apparently there's little difference. At least when creating dynamic
interfaces, I'd like
I was just looking through those classes again.
I think ORMRow is generally OK, since it's mostly a simple CRUD wrapper to
deal with some of the busy-work of making data access objects. I don't
really get the summary (updateSummaries/inSummaryMode) stuff though. I
guess the callers/subclasses do
51 matches
Mail list logo
