On 10/12/2010 9:58 PM, Trevor Parscal wrote: Correct, that's the problem you didn't even mention. -- Alex (wikipedia:en:User:Mr.Z-man)

On 10/12/10 7:42 PM, MZMcBride wrote: Show me the convention for naming extensions and I will follow it. As long as there is none, spending time going back and forth discussing the name of something that users will never see is indeed spending time on a trivial matter. That's an entirely different discussion, and the results of that discussion have so far been that any such action is being deferred until after 1.17.

On 10/12/10 8:03 PM, Chad wrote: I am explicitly requesting discussion about it so that I can take action based on the desire of the community. What cop-out are you referring to? The only response I've gotten so far is "merge into core", which is an interesting response, but does not resolve the issue at hand, which is, until we do so (assuming we do at some point after 1.17), what should this extension be named? I'm not defending the current name any more than stating it's my preference. I'm not only open to naming it something else, but I'm asking for input on what to name it. Some people are being somewhat combatant or getting tangential in their responses - fine, basically what I expect form this list - but I'm still very interested in responses to do with my original question, "should we rename it, and if so, what should we name it?". - Trevor

Please, please, don't rename it again. Every time the name changes things break. They break for us, they break for third parties using SVN, and it breaks our ability to easily support the extensions when people ask for help. Leave the name alone, and merge it into core as soon as possible. Respectfully, Ryan Lane

Trevor Parscal wrote: I contribute to MediaWiki development mostly through the #mediawiki IRC channel, answering simple questions that users have when they're trying to install or use MediaWiki. Being the most popular MediaWiki installation in the world, people often want to emulate features that they see on Wikipedia. My frustration from this thread (and from the code review comments) is that you're creating a mess. And you're doing it for the second time. There was already a skin named "Vector" and a sub-extension named "UsabilityInitiative/Vector". This caused a lot of confusion for a lot of people. It caused confusion when users asked questions and it caused confusion when their questions were answered. You've now introduced a third concept, a separate extension, called "Vector". Instead of saying "just install MediaWiki and you'll have the basic tools you need," we now have to say "well, MediaWiki comes with the Vector skin, but there's also 'UsabilityInitiative/Vector' and 'Vector' (the extension just called 'Vector') that you may or may not need to install based on the version of MediaWiki you're running." You don't answer these questions (or any support questions). That's fine, nobody's asking you to. But I do. And in my mind, you're needlessly adding a lot of confusion to what's already not the simplest installation process in the world. And even worse in my mind, you're making the _exact same mistake_ that you've already made. So when you've moved on to other projects, I'll still be trying to explain to new MediaWiki users what the difference is between all of these different concepts called "Vector". It's bad enough to create a giant mess that everyone else is forced to live with, but please don't waste people's time with discussion for the sake of saying you had a discussion. From your responses to this mailing list thread, it's pretty clear that come hell or high water, you're not going to revert yourself. In the time you've spent discussing this, you could have _easily_ merged this into core and moved on. I realize you don't respect me and my opinions, but what's absolutely mind-boggling is that plenty of people who you should respect have said the exact same thing as me, and you're still turning a deaf ear. I think your views and actions here are a showcase of the general current Wikimedia Foundation staff approach and attitude toward the community. I don't see how this approach and attitude is in any way acceptable, but I do see how, if it continues, it will ultimately kill the community behind these community-driven projects. MZMcBride

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 1:29 AM, Ryan Lane <rlane32(a)gmail.com> wrote: This. Renames are bad, period. Just look at the issues surrounding trying to standardize extension include files as Foo/Foo.php for the new installer[0]. That being said, I don't *think* we have a lot of people using the Vector extension (WMF sites, Translatewiki?), so a rename in this case shouldn't inconvenience a lot of people. If there is some compelling reason to keep this as an extension, a rename *is* in order, since Vector simply will not do. I do see that Roan (just now) has replied to the thread indicating his support for merging this stuff to core as well, so I wonder if it's all a moot point now and the extension can go the way of the Dodo. -Chad [0] See r65238-40, other revs from siebrand around 17th-18th of April this year

2010/10/13 Trevor Parscal <tparscal(a)wikimedia.org>rg>: With pretty much every participant in this thread (including myself, for the record) saying we should move these extensions into core ASAP (which I interpret to mean before 1.17), I think that statement is outdated at best. I realize you're hesitant to move Vector and WikiEditor into core, let alone do so before the 1.17 release, but I haven't seen anyone share that belief, and frankly I don't think any new commenters will. Let's just move Vector and WikiEditor into core soon and be done with it. Roan Kattouw (Catrope)

Thank you, everyone, for responding so far (not trying to stop you here). Here's where it seems we're at. 1. Having an extension called "Vector" is neither descriptive or clear, and it is anticipated to cause confusion. 2. System administrators are not enjoying things being switched around on them, and would prefer the name either not change or for the extension to be merged into core. 3. 3 out of 5 code reviewers are voting that it should be merged into core (Brion and Tim have not weighed in yet). My original hesitation to merge Vector (not to be lumped together with WikiEditor) into core was always that we were going to be extremely lean on CodeReview prior to 1.17 due to Tim Starling's limited availability right now. Since then we've added Roan, Chad, and me, and even brought Brion back for a bit part time to help out, thus increasing our capacity beyond what was originally expected. I think under these new circumstances, if we have Roan and Chad willing to help me integrate it into core and sign off on it, it will likely be of very little additional effort for our release manager (Tim Starling) to sign off as well, thus alleviating my apprehension about merging it prior to 1.17. So, unless there's any objection, I will go ahead and merge the Vector extension into core as part of the Vector skin immediately, rather than waiting until after 1.17. - Trevor On 10/13/10 12:38 AM, Maciej Jaros wrote:

On 2010-10-13, Trevor Parscal wrote: I did not realise decisions were now being voted on by code reviewers, this is very concerning. Since it has been deployed to the Wikimedia cluster, has it not already had more than sufficient review that we would be comfortable including it in a release? That would be great. Robert

On 10/13/10 3:00 AM, Robert Leverington wrote: Read the next paragraph, I am simply stating that there is willingness to support the review of the integration. Perhaps "voting" was a bad choice of word, but I think if you take it in the context of the entire conversation it's clear I'm not literally asking for a few people to vote to determine the final decision. Well, breaking it up into lots of little pieces and spreading it out all over the code base (the current reality of integrating an extension into core) is going to require review, adding complexity to the release. - Trevor

2010/10/13 Maciej Jaros <egil(a)wp.pl>pl>: Good point. I was gonna suggest moving the toolbar at least, but doing so without moving the rest of WikiEditor doesn't make much sense. If we make the WikiEditor default config sane so the unstable features are disabled by default (Trevor may already have done this, I don't remember) I guess telling people to install WikiEditor after which the toolbar will Just Work for them is fine. Roan Kattouw (Catrope)