(Anyway I'm just grumping. I hear positive things about plans for this year and I'm heartened to see more folks involved in planning the next stages!)
-- brion On Mon, Jan 3, 2022, 6:10 AM Brion Vibber <bvib...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 30, 2021, 10:27 AM Samuel Klein <meta...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Separate thread. I'm not sure which list is appropriate. >> *... but not all the way to sentience >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Uplift_War>.* >> >> The annual community wishlist survey (implemented by a small team, >> possibly in isolation?) may not be the mechanism for prioritizing large >> changes, but the latter also deserves a community-curated priority queue. >> To complement the staff-maintained priorities in phab ~ >> >> For core challenges (like Commons stability and capacity), I'd be >> surprised if the bottleneck were people or budget. >> > > Currently there are zero people and no budget for multimedia, aside from > whatever work I and others manage to get done here there. And I'm afraid I > don't scale. > > It's Wikimedia Foundation's job to assign budget and people here. I've > been hoping for years that this will happen, and continue to hope. > > > -- brion > > We do need a shared understanding of what issues are most important and >> most urgent, and how to solve them. For instance, a way to turn Amir's >> recent email about the problem (and related phab tickets) into a family of >> persistent, implementable specs and proposals and their articulated >> obstacles. >> >> An issue tracker like phab is good for tracking the progress and >> dependencies of agreed-upon tasks, but weak for discussing what is >> important, what we know about it, how to address it. And weak for >> discussing ecosystem-design issues that are important and need persistent >> updating but don't have a simple checklist of steps. >> >> So where is the best current place to discuss scaling Commons, and all >> that entails? Some examples from recent discussions (most from the wm-l >> thread below): >> - *Uploads*: Support for large file uploads / Keeping bulk upload tools >> online >> - *Video*: Debugging + rolling out the videojs >> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T248418> player >> - *Formats*: Adding support for CML >> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T18491> and dozens of other >> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T297514> common high-demand file >> formats >> - *Thumbs*: Updating thumbor <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T216815> >> and librsvg <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T193352> >> - *Search*: WCQS still <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T297454> down >> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T297454>, noauth option >> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T297995> wanted for tools >> - *General*: Finish implementing redesign >> <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T28741> of the image table >> >> SJ >> >> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 6:26 AM Amir Sarabadani <ladsgr...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I'm not debating your note. It is very valid that we lack proper support >>> for multimedia stack. I myself wrote a detailed rant on how broken it is >>> [1] but three notes: >>> - Fixing something like this takes time, you need to assign the budget >>> for it (which means it has to be done during the annual planning) and if >>> gets approved, you need to start it with the fiscal year (meaning July >>> 2022) and then hire (meaning, write JD, do recruitment, interview lots of >>> people, get them hired) which can take from several months to years. Once >>> they are hired, you need to onboard them and let them learn about our >>> technical infrastructure which takes at least two good months. Software >>> engineering is not magic, it takes time, blood and sweat. [2] >>> - Making another team focus on multimedia requires changes in planning, >>> budget, OKR, etc. etc. Are we sure moving the focus of teams is a good >>> idea? Most teams are already focusing on vital parts of wikimedia and >>> changing the focus will turn this into a whack-a-mole game where we fix >>> multimedia but now we have critical issues in security or performance. >>> - Voting Wishlist survey is a good band-aid in the meantime. To at >>> least address the worst parts for now. >>> >>> I don't understand your point tbh, either you think it's a good idea to >>> make requests for improvements in multimedia in the wishlist survey or you >>> think it's not. If you think it's not, then it's offtopic to this thread. >>> >>> [1] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/WMPZHMXSLQJ6GONAVTFLDFFMPNJDVORS/ >>> [2] There is a classic book in this topic called "The Mythical Man-month" >>> >>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2021 at 11:41 AM Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> we have to vote for regular maintenance and support for >>>> essential functions like uploading files which is the core mission of >>>> Wikimedia Commons >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> Commons-l mailing list -- common...@lists.wikimedia.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to commons-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org >> >
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list -- wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l Public archives at https://lists.wikimedia.org/hyperkitty/list/wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org/message/QSMXL63X3QT3RTSQRSSCBJNANQJ52YBT/ To unsubscribe send an email to wikimedia-l-le...@lists.wikimedia.org
