> The problem was never IPv6. The problem was always about the unspoken > expectation that everyone else would just drop everything else they have > going on to patch up all the stuff that got broken as a result of this > sudden change. I get that this was an exciting step for the engineers who > got it done, and I tip my hat to all of them for pulling it off; from that > sense it's been a successful implementation. I also get that at least 30% > of WMF users on hundreds of projects -that's roughly how many use one or > more gadgets, scripts or tools that didn't work after this switch - have > now had their "editing experience" negatively affected, and that almost all > of it could have been avoided with a month or two of notice so that patches > could be written and resources could be put into place in advance. One has > to hope this was a knowledge gap and that Engineering did not actually know > the extent to which it would impact the projects and the end-users. >
Are the breakages on the site really that massive? We've been getting little to no reports of breakages. If you are asking for us to notify the community earlier, I accept that. We did this last minute because we wanted to participate on IPv6 day, and we had a few free days to do so right before it. I apologize that it's poorly affecting your workflow, but your level of anger is unwarranted. We've been pretty good about announcing things in general. All user-facing HTTPS changes were announced weeks before they were made, for instance. Remember, that this is the ops group you're complaining about, and not engineering as a whole, and we rarely make user-facing changes. If you are complaining about things being broken, we need to know exactly what they are, or we can't help. Tell us whats broken here, or even better, add some bugs. - Ryan _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
