On 06/11/2015 09:40 AM, Quim Gil wrote:
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
This is a solvable problem. For example, it could be added to
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Writing_an_extension_for_deployment and
people can be reminded of it.
* if non-Wikimedia repos receive little attention when they are mixed
with the rest, imagine what happens when we take them out our sight.
The apparent policy is that any open source project related to MediaWiki
can be in Gerrit.
I support that, but it doesn't mean I'm willing or able to review it.
* I'm naturally going to be more likely to review WMF-deployed software,
both since I work for the WMF, and because it generally has more impact.
* There is a lot of non-WMF deployed software that I am never going to
review, and this should not negatively affect our metrics.
** I am probably never going to review extensions like
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Google_Analytics_Integration
and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Google_AdSense (certainly
not on WMF time), both for philosophical reasons and because it's not
relevant to the WMF.
** There are a lot of other non-WMF extensions that are probably
perfectly useful, but I just don't have time to learn.
We want these metrics to be fair if people are to take them into account.
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 agree, but for non-WMF extensions, that job should primarily fall to
the maintainer(s) of that extension. If there is no maintainer, then
maybe it should be moved to yet a third list ("WMF-deployed", "not
WMF-deployed", "Completely unmaintained").
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.
WIP should ideally reflect the author's intentions ("do I the author of
the patch feel it's done?", not whether it's likely to be merged).
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?
Yes (except I really know almost nothing about wikistats), but none of
them were even in the top 10 apparently when you sent the email. It's
great to have non-WMF extensions in Gerrit, and it's fine to track the
metrics. They should just be tracked separate if it's to be part of WMF
team accountability.
Matt
_______________________________________________
teampractices mailing list
teampractices@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
