Recently a little bird told me "Main roundtrip quality target achieved" for
the Parsoid, having >99.95% percentage of clean roundtrip.
Given this information, I would expect we can use the Parsoid to "cleanup"
its own (previous) mess based on lots of bug fixes done during the time.
Even if it can't do it, the process of doing this with parsoid is a kind of
verification to bug fixes. (can we get to 99.95% percentage clean
roundtrip for such cases?)
Sometimes the Parsoid doesn't have to deal with its own mess, but in this
case maybe it is good idea to attach to a bug fix also a maintaince script
to fix previous issues
(similar to the requirement of attaching a unittest), rather than writing
bots that work in specific wikis as the problems arise in many wikis,
and it requires other devs time to understand the bug and come up with
their own magic regex to fix issue which may not be fully compatible with
the fix.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 11:55 PM, Nicolas Vervelle <nvervelle(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:31 PM, C. Scott Ananian
<cananian(a)wikimedia.org
wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 11:14 AM, Nicolas Vervelle <nvervelle(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > - Second, I'm not a big
fan of VE changing wikitext in parts not
> > modified by the user: experience shows that it messes the diffs, and
> > makes
> > watching what VE is doing a lot more difficult. It has been
requested
> > several times that VE doesn't start modifying wikitext in places not
> > modified by the user.
>
> In case it wasn't clear, this is already the case.
Parsoid/VE uses
> "selective serialization" to avoid touching unmodified content. This
> feature has been present since the beginning.
Yes, I'm aware of that, but I was answering this because it was suggested
previously in the discussion to use VE to do the cleanup...
Nico
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l