On 02/24/2013 02:43 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Mark, your assumptions about LQT are blatantly wrong or in other words
> it's just wishful thinking.
Ok, I can accept that.
But your next statement seems to contradict this.
Here is what I thought I said:
given where LQT is used (some WMF sites and, as you point out, TWN),
we can assume it will be safe to use LQT against the HEAD of git for
the foreseeable future.
People shouldn't expect great new features, but they can that
it will remain as usable as it is *in its current state* for the
foreseeable future.
You said:
> Tests are done as usual by translatewiki.net on the last code, then some
> volunteers take care of the worst problems: usually it's TWN staff, but
> few days ago Krenair has submitted fixes for a dozen major/critical bugs
I'm not sure how this doesn't match up with my assumptions. Maybe I
gave the impression that I thought LQT was rock solid and bugs were
being fixed quickly?
If so, that wasn't my intent. I like LQT better than the talk page
format, but I have used it enough to realize that it isn't free of
warts. And I realize, too, that it doesn't have a full-time paid
developer devoted to it.
Instead, I was trying to figure out how much attention people are paying
to it, given the places it is being used. I'm glad to see Krenair and
others fixing bugs.
Mark.
--
http://hexmode.com/
There is no path to peace. Peace is the path.
-- Mahatma Gandhi, "Non-Violence in Peace and War"
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
