On 31/08/11 04:46, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
> As promised on wikitech-l (http://hexm.de/5u), I'm sending email to
> all MediaWiki developers with any FIXME'd revisions. I'll be sending
> a reminder at least twice a week from now on for any outstanding
> FIXMEs.
>
> Link to all your FIXMEs:
> http://mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/status/fixme?author=nikola
>
> Rev #: Commit message
> r86692: CSS, per http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Interlanguage/WMF_Design_Pass
> r74208: Pair to the Interlanguage extension....
> r74204: July 30 2010: Display link(s) to the page(s) on the central wiki with...
>
> Please address them as soon as possible. When you think you've
> addressed one, change its status field from "fixme" to "new" and make
> sure your new revision shows up under "Follow-up revisions"
>
> If you have any questions about this, then please feel free to email
> me.
I asked Mark already, but he hasn't answered (or at least I haven't
noticed his answer), so I guess it is appropriate to ask the questions here.
How can I change the status of a revision from fixme to new? And how can
I make a revision show up under Follow-up revisions?
Hi,
I am a GSoC'11 student, this summer I have developed
Extension:SignupAPI http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SignupAPI with
jorm as my mentor.
This extension creates a special page that cleans up SpecialUserLogin from
signup related stuff, adds an API for signup, adds sourcetracking for
account creation & provides Ajax-ified validation for signup form.
A few concerns are:-
1) Security over Ajax validation, there was quite some debate over this
during project start but a common consensus could not be reached. Therefore,
I have made this option user configurable
2) Managing layout with the extra space occupied by the client side
validation indicators. Currently, I have added <span> tags for displaying
them next to their respective input fields but it is not consistent
especially when there are long messages to be displayed.
3) Integration with Clicktracking extension. Can the sourcetracking part of
my extension be integrated with clicktracking? Would it offer additional
benefits?
4) Integration with core. Currently, my extension supports only MW 1.19,
should it also support earlier versions? Would that affect its early
adoption into core? What other factors need to be handled before core
integration?
I am eagerly looking forward to all your comments & suggestions. Overall,
working with MediaWiki as my GSoC organisation has been a wonderful learning
experience & am excited to continue contributing in the coming days.
Thanks to everyone of you who has helped me in making this project a
reality!
User: Akshay.agarwal
Hi,
Just a quick thought about the recent change feed [1]. Wouldn't it be
interesting to transform it in a GeoRSS [2]?
This would be done by adding the coordinate from the articles, if
available, and/or by using rssToGeo [3] where coordinates are
unavailable? I'm not necessarily looking to get that included in
MediaWiki, but I would like to see if creating a "recent changes on a
map" service would be useful to someone.
Thanks for your feedback,
Strainu
[1] http://ro.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Schimb%E3ri_recente&feed=…
[2] http://georss.org/Main_Page
[3] http://www.geonames.org/rss-to-georss-converter.html
The current implementation of MediaWiki:Sidebar supports a completely
undocumented * {{msg}} syntax.
It works along the lines of:
* header
** {{msgname}}
And ends up with a 'header' section with the parsed contents of
MediaWiki:Msgname outputted into it.
This feature didn't exist in 1.16, was introduced but was seemingly
completely broken in 1.17 and finally made to work in 1.18.
However I have a number of issues with it:
Conceptually:
* The concept makes little sense, it uses the {{}} template syntax, but
actually takes a message from the MediaWiki namespace, and it of course
doesn't support any real transclusion syntax
Implementation:
* The implementation is a mess, with successive {{msgname}} calls in the
same header replacing rather than appending to, and using a mess of a
setup where these blocks are actually put into a separate array which is
array_merged into the real sidebar array at the end.
But mostly I have a problem with the fact that it's getting in my way.
I'm currently trying to fix up the limitation in our skin system that
only allows us to sanely have one type of navigation (the sidebar). With
the implementation of a new navigation message parser that can handle
varying formats of messages. However {{msgname}} is not something that
can see be cleanly implemented in it.
I'd like to remove this feature from 1.18 before it ends up released and
people actually start using this feature in production where we start
having to deal with backcompat.
Are there any objections to it being removed?
--
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://daniel.friesen.name]
Hi,
I installed OpenID to try to keep my wiki as open as possible while
hoping to stop spam. (Since the 'human spambot' attack earlier this
year, I've changed from my 'captcha all anonymous and no registered
edits' strategy).
However, I'm now seeing spam from people logging in to my wiki using
Google OpenID accounts, e.g.
http://metadatabase.org/wiki/User:Mykaila298
How can I report these accounts to Google?
I think OpenID is a great way to consolidate identities across
multiple wikis, and to identify contributors semi-formally, however,
if OpenID providers are easy for spammers to infiltrate, I'll have to
rethink the whole approach.
Thanks for any suggestions.
Dan.
I am trying to relate the edit counts at English Wikisource and I am wondering whether one
or more of the namespace is not being added to the count. I cannot find where or how one
can see the configuration for edit count for the system.
I have done some comparisons and do see a discrepancy but cannot find the tool author's
(hunting in IRC) to ask questions, so I am coming back to the general forum for info.
Tools used
* [[Special:Preferences]] [0]
--> edit count
* vvv's YAEC [1]; and
--> edit count and per namespace count
* Soxred's editcounter [2]
--> edit count and per namespace count (with a live and deleted count)
When I do a comparison of the _total_ edit counts
[0] = [1] != [2]
When I do a sanity check of the tools
[1] total != sum [1] of namespace
[2] total = sum [2] of namespace (live edits only, not deleted)
BUT sum [1] of namepsace = sum [2] of namespace
To me the [2] data seems to be correct as it matches the namespace counts, and the totals
are correct.
This leads me to believe that
* [1] total is pulling a separate total count, and not a summed total.
* [0] count is wrong, missing data, and one cannot tell from where, so I am presuming that
it is missing from omitting one or more namespace pairs
As mentioned, I tried to check where one may do some verification, however that is not
evident. Some guidance would be appreciated.
[1] toolserver.org/~vvv/yaec.php?
[2] toolserver.org/~soxred93/pcount/index.php
Regards, Andrew
PS. I have not done a similar comparison for other wikis, as I thought that I would
understand the basics first.
Hi Joachim,
thank you for your message. I agree that it'd be brilliant if third-party
users wouldn't have to branch MediaWiki for their code! Hiding some things
behind a configuration variable, like how Markus suggested, is certainly
doable, to an extent. However, there will be things that need to be
rethought and maybe even completely rewritten; patches like
http://trac.wikia-code.com/changeset/11900/wikia/trunk/includes/api come to
mind. Likewise, both Wikia and wikiHow have some custom methods and member
variables in some core files, such as includes/User.php; some can be moved
to a custom class and/or done via hooks, but there are some things that I'm
not too sure of, such as wikiHow's getBotIDs() method in includes/User.php,
for example.
I actually sent this message to wikitech-l and CC'd various third-party
developers on it; I don't know why your message isn't showing up in the
wikitech-l archives (
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2011-August/thread.html),
though.
Like K. Peachey mentioned earlier, using SVN's "external" property might be
a good way of including libraries that we don't want to host on
svn.wikimedia.org for one reason or another.
I'd like to know more about frameworks used by third parties and why you use
them. If I recall correctly, wikiHow uses Prototype for some of their
JavaScript code, but they're moving towards jQuery. Wikia has various
different frameworks (http://trac.wikia-code.com/browser/wikia/trunk/lib) on
their SVN, such as phpFlickr, PHPUnit, Stomp and more.
One interesting point to consider is the edge case of having to edit library
code for some reason. For example, you might need to fix a PHP notice (like
what was done in
http://trac.wikia-code.com/changeset?new=40808@wikia%2Ftrunk%2Flib%2FHTTP&o…)
or even a fatal or something like that. What'd be the best solution in such
case? I think that submitting a patch to the upstream developers of the
library would be the best approach, obviously, but it might be that some
libraries aren't even maintained anymore or the maintainers do not have very
much time...maybe then we should note somewhere that you need to patch the
code.
Let's say that we have an extension called FooBar in
svn.wikimedia.org/mediawiki/trunk/extensions/FooBar. It has an external
dependency on a library called Baz, which is hosted on Google Code. However,
line 15 of Baz's BazClass.php contains code that throws a notice on modern
PHP versions. In this case, I'd keep the Baz library as the svn:external of
the FooBar extension but I'd add a README to the extension directory, to
explain what needs patching in the external library and why and how to apply
the patch.
On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 7:08 PM, Joachim Bode <joachim.bode(a)twoonix.com>wrote:
> Hi Jack, hi all,
>
> I think it is indeed a good idea to provide a possibility for 3rd party
> devs to store branches at /mediawiki/branches/. To me the attempt of
> creating a way to add additional hooks *without* having to branch, that is
> tied to this question, is even more important. I like Markus' idea of a
> $wgExecuteExpensiveHooks Setting.
>
> How about CC-ing the wikitech-l list for this?
>
> We use GIT internally, but I don't Know about an option that allows for
> "hooking" a remote repository. There are hooks, but afaik - like in mw -
> only to call e.g. pre and post commit operations. But I doubt that would
> make us get rid of the legal aspects anyway.
>
> For inclusion of frameworks I would prefer providing a framework management
> that integrates them in one single location for the whole installation. This
> would check for version inconsistencies especially for JS fws and make sure
> that the same fw is not stored inside multiple extensions which does not
> work for different JS fw versions anyway.
>
> All the best,
> Achim
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
Thanks and regards,
--
Jack Phoenix
MediaWiki developer
The developers of Kiwix, an offline Wikipedia reader, had a problem in
the .deb package of Kiwix 0.9 beta1, as delivered via Ubuntu's Personal
Package Archive: Kiwix simply would not launch at all.
Emmanuel Engelhart, Kiwix developer, believes his team just fixed it
(thanks to some troubleshooting they and I did at Wikimania).
Can someone on Ubuntu install Kiwix 0.9 beta2 via the Ubuntu PPA and
verify that it launches? http://www.kiwix.org/index.php/Ubuntu_PPA has
the directions -- ppa:kiwixteam/ppa is the repository, as you can see on
https://launchpad.net/~kiwixteam/+archive/ppa .
(And if you're interested in testing Kiwix more thoroughly, you can join
the Kiwix testers' mailing list at
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kiwix-testing . Kiwix is
cross-platform and needs testers on Windows, Macintosh & Linux.)
--
Sumana Harihareswara
Volunteer Development Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation