A number of comments:
1. The community is an a massive untapped resource for development. (They
like to edit wikis, upload photos and also to code....)
e.g. The amount of Template Code in about 20 times the size of
MediaWiki code base.
2. I would seriouly look at maximizing its potential before allocating more
funds for paid devlopment.
2.1 This means making it much easier to develop/test/deploy to Live wikis.
(Short Tutorials, Code Samples, Documentation)
2.2 Create a culture where new coders are assigned to work with experinced
coders to fix and maintaining existing code.
2.3 Motivating paid developer to work (i.e. review and direct) the
community....
2.4 Team up with Wikia and WikiHow Devteams on common features and on small
wiki testing.
3. Looking at the metrics - The Mediawiki team is still not setup to do
developement like other leading Open Souce development communities.
Git is a step in the right direction but - the agility of the teams is
too low to collaborate at the levels required.
to accept "AnonymousDonation" of source from the community.
While I applud Sumana who does a great job with the community - this
works needs to be followed though organicaly by all members of the
development teams
or we will continue sending the community the message - that we prefer
to delay fixing bugs, pay a premiunm for new features etc ...
4. Only once such issues are adressed would it become productive to engage
more developers with WMF or external funding.
5. The one point I do agree with is that features the community asks for
should be given due proirity and this process should be more transparent.
Oren Bochman
On Mon, Sep 3, 2012 at 8:10 PM, Mr. Gregory Varnum <gregory.var...@gmail.com
> wrote:
> I'll post more on the RFC, but I wonder if an entity within WMF would be
> more appropriate and realistic. Utilizing the existing operations structure
> would be far easier. Perhaps setup something like FDC to oversee priorities
> and funds.
>
> My hunch is WMF would be far more likely to sign off on something they
> retain a sense of sign-off on for the sake of maintaining the WMF projects
> than having to deal with an independent entity that would have the legal
> right to go rogue one day and not do what's in the best interest of the WMF
> projects. I recognize to some extent that's the point, but looking down a 5
> year road of possibilities, is that something we'd ever want to happen? My
> feeling is no and allowing WMF to maintain some level of authority in the
> development of MediaWiki is in our collective best interests. From project
> management, fundraising, usability, system resources and paid developer
> support perspective.
>
> I would instead propose a MediaWiki department or collective (insert your
> favorite term here).
>
> -Greg aka varnent
>
> ____________
> Sent from my iPhone. Apologies for any typos. A more detailed response may
> be sent later.
>
> On Sep 1, 2012, at 10:42 PM, MZMcBride <z...@mzmcbride.com> wrote:
>
> > Daniel Friesen wrote:
> >> Done in true developer style "[RFC] MediaWiki Foundation":
> >>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/MediaWiki_Foundation
> >
> > Thank you for this! This is exactly what I had in mind.
> >
> > It's interesting, with a lot of (proposed) non-profits, the biggest
> concerns
> > are engaging volunteers and generating income. With this proposed
> > foundation, I think most of the typical concerns aren't in play.
> Instead, as
> > Nikerabbit so deftly commented on the RFC's talk page, the big question
> is:
> >
> > What projects would a MediaWiki Foundation work on and how would those
> > projects be chosen?
> >
> > This seems to be _the_ crucial issue. Getting grants from the Wikimedia
> > Foundation or Wikia or others doesn't seem like it'd be very difficult.
> > Assuming there was broad support for the creation of such a foundation
> from
> > active MediaWiki developers (and related stakeholders), getting the
> > Wikimedia Foundation to release the trademark and domain also doesn't
> seem
> > like it would be very difficult. But there's a huge unresolved question
> > about how, out of the infinite number of project ideas, a MediaWiki
> > Foundation would choose which ideas to financially support.
> >
> >> As you command oh great catalyst[1].
> >> [1] Hope you don't mind. I found it amusing. And it kind of fits in a
> >> positive way.
> >
> > Cute. :-)
> >
> > MZMcBride
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
--
Oren Bochman
Office tel. 061 4921492
Mobile +36 30 866 6706
skype id: orenbochman
e-mail: o...@romai-horizon.com
site http://www.riverport.hu
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
