https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=60220
--- Comment #10 from Tim Landscheidt <t...@tim-landscheidt.de> --- (In reply to comment #9) > Just mentioning that there are other needs for postgresql than just this, see > #48896. Do you reckon Yes, but a) we don't need PostgreSQL for a wiki and b) that would probably be a WONTFIX at WMF :-). wiki.toolserver.org is very plain and no frills, and there are no problems migrating it to MySQL (or any other backend). > I am rather wondering why the wiki should stay writeable, with wikitech being > the new wiki for tools. Couldn't we just keep a read-only toolserver wiki as > an > archive (which is really good to have) and keep it in postgresql for > simplicity? > (If not, why?) At some point in the future it should certainly be turned read-only. But if we migrate wiki.toolserver.org for example next month, people might want to add information where specific tools went to, update links to their user pages, etc. I think it's easier if we keep it writeable for users with a justification, rather than locking it totally up and having to handle every change by an admin. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
