> I don't think adding a couple more services is going to drastically alter the > current situation.
MediaWik core and most of the extensions actually only depend on php and mysql, both are de facto standard included most in webhosting packages, which makes MediaWiki to run (in theory) on a wide range of web hosting packages, and updating isn't too difficult, if you follow the steps on the upgrade page on mediawiki.org [1] (ok, more difficult as other software packages). Adding new services, like parsoid or other stuff, makes upgrading core and extensions more complicated: -> you need to update the service as well (or hold it on a compatible version) (see my last point, too) -> you need shell access (most web hosting packages don't offer shell access, which isn't good, yeah, but maybe, for some wiki administrators it's better, that they don't have shell access (even without root access)) -> maybe for some services it's more as just "run apt-get upgrade" or upload your ftp files to the server and run the update script, which makes the whole process much more complicated [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Upgrading -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: wikitech-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikitech-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] Im Auftrag von Ryan Lane Gesendet: Freitag, 16. Januar 2015 18:28 An: Wikimedia developers Betreff: Re: [Wikitech-l] The future of shared hosting On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 4:29 AM, David Gerard <dger...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 16 January 2015 at 07:38, Chad <innocentkil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > These days I'm not convinced it's our job to support every possible > > scale of wiki install. There's several simpler and smaller wiki > > solutions for people who can't do more than FTP a few files to a folder. > > > In this case the problem is leaving users and their wiki content > unsupported. Because they won't move while it "works", even as it > becomes a Swiss cheese of security holes. Because their content is > important to them. > > This is the part of the mission that involves everyone else producing > the sum of human knowledge. They used our software, if we're > abandoning them then don't pretend there's a viable alternative for > them. You know there isn't. > > What you're forgetting is that WMF abandoned MediaWiki as an Open Source project quite a while ago (at least 2 years ago). There's a separate org that gets a grant from WMF to handle third party use, and it's funded just well enough to keep the lights on. Take a look at the current state of MediaWiki on the internet. I'd be surprised if less than 99% of the MediaWiki wikis in existence are out of date. Most are probably running a version from years ago. The level of effort required to upgrade MediaWiki and its extensions that don't list compatibility with core versions is past the skill level of most people that use the software. Even places with a dedicated ops team find MediaWiki difficult to keep up to date. Hell, I find it difficult and I worked for WMF on the ops team and have been a MediaWiki dev since 1.3. I don't think adding a couple more services is going to drastically alter the current situation. - Ryan _______________________________________________ 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
