On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 3:40 PM, James Forrester &lt;jforrester(a)wikimedia.org&gt; wrote: I'm glad to hear that you are accepting responsibility for OOjs UI development! Do you have a timeline on a fix for T113681, or a page that indicates what higher-priority development you and your team are working on in the near future? Let's not chop logic here. If "a few things that some people want to do" cannot be done due to T113681, then T113681 is indeed blocking some further development even if other further development isn't blocked. This email thread isn't even about T113681 specifically, it's about that there are no development resources for fixing things in OOjs UI unless someone is willing to do it as a skunkworks project, and OOjs UI isn't yet a finished product where we might be able to justify that. I'm disappointed that you don't think that the fact that "some things people want to do" are blocked and no development resources are available to remedy the situation is cause for concern. When the situation was brought up in today's Scrum of Scrums, the consensus was that it is indeed concerning. Since you brought it up, let's look at my patch. There are two concrete blockers that have been raised on my patch. Neither of them actually have to do with the form of the patch itself. The long-standing blocker has been disagreement over how the widget can be internationalized in the context of OOjs UI: The Language and translatewiki faction wants OOjs UI developers to integrate cldrjs, while the OOjs UI developers are unwilling to make any decision as to whether cldrjs is the way to go or translatewiki will just have to deal with providing translations for month and weekday names as they do for everything else. The closest we have to a decision is really a cop-out: "shove it into MediaWiki even though it doesn't belong there, because MediaWiki already happens to have most of the needed i18n strings and we can't make any decision here". In last week's Scrum of Scrums, you brought up T113681 as a new blocker: OOjs UI is already too large, so we can't add new stuff until someone reworks it to be able to load individual components. MatmaRex then stated that no one owns or maintains OOjs UI to the extent that we can expect T113681 to be solved any time soon, which brought the lack of maintainership in OOjs UI into clear view. MatmaRex also raised some other objections (disagreement with Design's design, non-use of moment.js despite moment.js not gaining us anything, doubt that anyone actually needs <input type="datetime"> despite evidence to the contrary), but no one else has agreed with those and he hasn't deigned to respond to attempts at further discussion in Gerrit. If you have objections to the actual form of my patch, as opposed to lack of a willingness to make any decision on the i18n issue or any progress on the form of OOjs UI as a whole, you should raise them in Gerrit instead of continuing to sit on them. Although I wonder why you haven't done so already. -- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Senior Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l