| Legoktm added a comment. |
I like Krinkle's idea the most (option #5) for now, mostly because it's probably the easiest, and seems relatively straightforward to move away from in the future.
Full preference list: 5, 3, 2, 4, 1.
In T174922#3583384, @WMDE-leszek wrote:One concern with the Option 5 I could imagine is that the separation between those libs and the "core" Wikibase is drawn less strict than e.g. when those libs are only pulled in when "building" Wikibase & co (option 4), or when they're technically separate git repos/submodules (option 3). I realize though it might be simply seen as a matter of personal taste (or discipline) which of those options is "simpler" or "better" (tm). Just mentioning here, hopefully I am not seetting the bikeshedding wheel into motion here.
Yeah, there's a more increased chance that someone will add something MW specific in a folder that's supposed to be a library. We occasionally have people introduce MW-specific code in core's includes/libs/ directory which is all supposed to be independent code, but it usually gets caught in CR. Theoretically there could be a CI test that looks for "mw." or something in directories to prevent it.
Also, if we choose #5 (or whatever), it shouldn't be set in stone, just a holdover until T107561: MediaWiki support for Composer equivalent for _javascript_ packages happens.
Cc: Krinkle, Aklapper, Addshore, Legoktm, greg, Lydia_Pintscher, daniel, thiemowmde, Aleksey_WMDE, Jonas, hoo, aude, demon, WMDE-leszek, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, Liudvikas, Izno, Luke081515, Wikidata-bugs, zeljkofilipin, Mbch331
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
