On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Matthew Flaschen <mflasc...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
> When I look at the korma page, the two first pages are for MediaWiki >> extensions that have been abandoned ages ago. >> > > Yes. I didn't verify the "abandoned" part, but at most three of the first > 10 in 'Ranking of repositories' are WMF-deployed. > Some of the very old open patches have been addressed, and the list has been refreshed now (it used to refresh on a daily basis, I have filed https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T102112 to improve the current refresh frequency. These metrics would be far more meaningful if they were separated into > WMF-deployed software and non-WMF deployed. > We had this before, but it caused two problems: * keeping https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Key_Wikimedia_software_projects up to date and in sync with korma was not easy * if non-Wikimedia repos receive little attention when they are mixed with the rest, imagine what happens when we take them out our sight. Most of these repos only have 1-2 patches. Cleaning the way is relatively easy in half of the cases, especially if we agree that the pragmatic "let's clean the backlog in non-critical areas" is preferable to the impossible goal of "let's be absolutely nice with every single patch in some unmaintained repo that is stuck during more than a year". I have been marking old quiet changesets in likely abandoned repos with "[WIP]" to get them out of the way, sometimes with the help of Jenkins bringing a -1 after the change. After a bit of superficial cleaning, the WMF maintained repos that need more attention will start to emerge. As of now: 12. UploadWizard 16. Wikistats 21. MassMessage 22. Campaigns 30. Echo These names start sounding familiar, right? http://korma.wmflabs.org/browser/gerrit_review_queue.html
_______________________________________________ teampractices mailing list teampractices@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices