Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 05:59, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.org wrote: I'd like to look towards trimming some of the existing preferences that are no longer relevant, and adding new preferences as common sense dictates. Can I suggest adding a preferred editor preference? Ideally, it should be a dropdown box (given the variety of existing visual editors http://usability.wikimedia.org/wiki/Environment_Survey/MediaWiki_Extensions/Nomination#Editing, an admin might wish to install more than one), but a simple disable the visual editor checkbox is probably enough for most setups (and simpler to maintain). Thanks, bye -- Jacopo Corbetta j.corbe...@sssup.it jacopo.corbe...@gmail.com WYMeditor MediaWiki integration: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:MeanEditor ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
Hi! On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.org wrote: The advantage of this clear separation is that writing an API module is very simple, and it can be called internally, too! I think will be good idea to use API internally (not only have possibility to call), as result code will have more testing and coverage. Eugene. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
thanks, I take this as the first step in creating global preferences? On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:36 AM, Eugene Zelenko eugene.zele...@gmail.comwrote: Hi! On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.org wrote: The advantage of this clear separation is that writing an API module is very simple, and it can be called internally, too! I think will be good idea to use API internally (not only have possibility to call), as result code will have more testing and coverage. Eugene. ___ 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
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 5:59 AM, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.orgwrote: I've branch-merged the new preferences system that I've spent the last few weeks developing. On the outside, you probably won't notice any difference except a few bugfixes, but the internals have undergone a complete rewrite. All of the actual preference definitions and utility functions have been separated out into Preferences.php, which holds all business logic for the new system. The UI and submission logic for the system is done in SpecialPreferences.php, which, now only a hundred lines long, wraps a generic class I've written to encourage separation of business and UI logic called 'HTMLForm'. The advantage of this clear separation is that writing an API module is very simple, and it can be called internally, too! Extensions must now hook GetPreferences instead of the existing hooks (which were too low-level to maintain compatibility with), I've updated all extensions used on Wikimedia. This new hook allows you to put preferences wherever you want, and a new preference can be added in less than ten lines of code, rather than the hundred-line nightmare that was required in the previous iteration. I'd like to look towards trimming some of the existing preferences that are no longer relevant, and adding new preferences as common sense dictates. Feedback, praise and criticism regarding the changes is certainly welcome! -- Andrew Garrett Sent from Sydney, Nsw, Australia ___ You are so useful. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
Le 24 avr. 09 à 16:15, John Doe a écrit : thanks, I take this as the first step in creating global preferences? Global preferences were added with this rewrite. There is just a checkbox saying use these preferences on all projects at the bottom of Special:Preferences. Alexandre Emsenhuber (ialex) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
Is an autoconverter feasible? There are many, many extensions guys! On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.orgwrote: On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, How much work do you think it will be to repair an extension that needs repair ? For someone who knows the code and for someone who just has to repair his one extension ?? It's a reasonably simple fix. Here's an example: [1] Essentially, all you need to do is remove your existing preferences code, hook GetPreferences, and add your preference to the array. I'll be posting documentation as to the format of preference entries tomorrow, but for now you can look at the examples in includes/Preferences.php. [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/49690 -- Andrew Garrett Sent from Sydney, Nsw, Australia ___ 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
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
And the vast vast majority don't use preferences. I don't think it'll be a huge issue. The extensions that are broken and people use will quickly be found and fixed. -Chad On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 12:43 PM, Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: Is an autoconverter feasible? There are many, many extensions guys! On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 9:53 AM, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.orgwrote: On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, How much work do you think it will be to repair an extension that needs repair ? For someone who knows the code and for someone who just has to repair his one extension ?? It's a reasonably simple fix. Here's an example: [1] Essentially, all you need to do is remove your existing preferences code, hook GetPreferences, and add your preference to the array. I'll be posting documentation as to the format of preference entries tomorrow, but for now you can look at the examples in includes/Preferences.php. [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/49690 -- Andrew Garrett Sent from Sydney, Nsw, Australia ___ 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 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 12:31 AM, Wu Zhe w...@madk.org wrote: Asynchronous daemon doesn't make much sense if page purge occurs on server side, but what if we put off page purge to the browser? It works like this: 1. mw parser send request to daemon 2. daemon finds the work non-trivial, reply *immediately* with a best fit or just a place holder 3. browser renders the page, finds it's not final, so sends a request to daemon directly using AJAX 4. daemon reply to the browser when thumbnail is ready 5. browser replace temporary best fit / place holder with new thumb using Javascript Daemon now have to deal with two kinds of clients: mw servers and browsers. Letting browser wait instead of mw server has the benefit of reduced latency for users while still have an acceptable page to read before image replacing takes place and a perfect page after that. For most of users, it's likely that the replacing occurs as soon as page loading ends, since transfering page takes some time, and daemon would have already finished thumbnailing in the process. How long does it take to thumbnail a typical image, though? Even a parser cache hit (but Squid miss) will take hundreds of milliseconds to serve and hundreds of more milliseconds for network latency. If we're talking about each image adding 10 ms to the latency, then it's not worth it to add all this fancy asynchronous stuff. Moreover, in MediaWiki's case specifically, *very* few requests should actually require the thumbnailing. Only the first request for a given size of a given image should ever require thumbnailing: that can then be cached more or less forever. So it's not a good case to optimize for. If the architecture should be simplified significantly at the cost of slight extra latency in 0.01% of requests, I think it's clear that the simpler architecture is superior. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
2009/4/24 Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.com: How long does it take to thumbnail a typical image, though? Even a parser cache hit (but Squid miss) will take hundreds of milliseconds to serve and hundreds of more milliseconds for network latency. If we're talking about each image adding 10 ms to the latency, then it's not worth it to add all this fancy asynchronous stuff. The problem here seems to be that thumbnail generation times vary a lot, based on format and size of the original image. It could be 10 ms for one image and 10 s for another, who knows. Moreover, in MediaWiki's case specifically, *very* few requests should actually require the thumbnailing. Only the first request for a given size of a given image should ever require thumbnailing: that can then be cached more or less forever. That's true, we're already doing that. So it's not a good case to optimize for. AFAICT this isn't about optimization, it's about not bogging down the Apache that has the misfortune of getting the first request to thumb a huge image (but having a dedicated server for that instead), and about not letting the associated user wait for ages. Even worse, requests that thumb very large images could hit the 30s execution limit and fail, which means those thumbs will never be generated but every user requesting it will have a request last for 30s and time out. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
All true. The images should not be rethumb'd unless resolution changes, a new version is uploaded, or the cache is otherwise purged. However, on initial rendering, the thumb generation can be a large part (especially if rendering multiple images) of overall page execution time. Being able to offload this elsewhere should decrease that load greatly. -Chad On Apr 24, 2009 1:23 PM, Roan Kattouw roan.katt...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/4/24 Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.comsimetrical%2bwikil...@gmail.com : How long does it take to thumbnail a typical image, though? Even a parser cache hit (but Squid ... The problem here seems to be that thumbnail generation times vary a lot, based on format and size of the original image. It could be 10 ms for one image and 10 s for another, who knows. Moreover, in MediaWiki's case specifically, *very* few requests should actually require the thu... That's true, we're already doing that. So it's not a good case to optimize for. AFAICT this isn't about optimization, it's about not bogging down the Apache that has the misfortune of getting the first request to thumb a huge image (but having a dedicated server for that instead), and about not letting the associated user wait for ages. Even worse, requests that thumb very large images could hit the 30s execution limit and fail, which means those thumbs will never be generated but every user requesting it will have a request last for 30s and time out. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list wikitec...@lists.wikimedia ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
2009/4/24 Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com: All true. The images should not be rethumb'd unless resolution changes, a new version is uploaded, or the cache is otherwise purged. Repeat: this is what we do already (not sure if that's what you're trying to say, but should implies differently). Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 1:46 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, How much work do you think it will be to repair an extension that needs repair ? For someone who knows the code and for someone who just has to repair his one extension ?? It's a reasonably simple fix. Here's an example: [1] Essentially, all you need to do is remove your existing preferences code, hook GetPreferences, and add your preference to the array. I'll be posting documentation as to the format of preference entries tomorrow, but for now you can look at the examples in includes/Preferences.php. [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/49690 -- Andrew Garrett Sent from Sydney, Nsw, Australia ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
I'm agreeing with you. By should I meant this should be happening already and issues with this are bugs. -Chad On Apr 24, 2009 1:32 PM, Roan Kattouw roan.katt...@gmail.com wrote: 2009/4/24 Chad innocentkil...@gmail.com: All true. The images should not be rethumb'd unless resolution changes, a new version is uploade... Repeat: this is what we do already (not sure if that's what you're trying to say, but should implies differently). Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ 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
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
On 4/24/09 10:32 AM, Roan Kattouw wrote: 2009/4/24 Chadinnocentkil...@gmail.com: All true. The images should not be rethumb'd unless resolution changes, a new version is uploaded, or the cache is otherwise purged. Repeat: this is what we do already (not sure if that's what you're trying to say, but should implies differently). Just to summarize the current state, here's the default MediaWiki configuration workflow: * During page rendering, MediaWiki checks if a thumb of the proper size exists. * if not, we resize it synchronously on the same server (via GD or shell out to ImageMagick etc) * an img pointing to the file is added to output * The web browser loads up the already-rendered image file in the page. Here's the behavior variant we have on Wikimedia sites: * During page rendering, we make an img pointing to where the thumbnail should be * The web browser requests the thumbnail image file * If it doesn't exist, the upload web server proxies the request [1] back to MediaWiki, running on a subcluster which handles only thumbnail generation * MediaWiki resizes it synchronously via shell out to ImageMagick * The web server serves the now-completed file back to the client, and it's now on disk for the next request [1] http://svn.wikimedia.org/viewvc/mediawiki/trunk/tools/upload-scripts/ This prevents slow or broken thumbnailing operations from bogging down the *main* web servers, but if it's not reasonably fast we still have difficulties: * No placeholder image -- browser just shows a nice blank box * Multiple requests will cause multiple attempts to resize at once, potentially eating up all CPU time/memory/tmp disk space on the thumbnailing cluster So if we've got, say, a 50 megapixel PNG or TIFF high-res scan, or a giant animated GIF which is very expensive to resize, we don't have a good way of producing a thumbnail on a good schedule. It'll either time out a lot every time it changes, or just never actually complete. If we have a way to defer things we know will take longer, and show a placeholder until it's completed, then we can use those things more reliably. One suggestion that's been brought up for large images is to create a smaller version *once at upload time* which can then be used to quickly create inline thumbnails of various sizes on demand. But we still need some way to manage that asynchronous initial rendering, and have some kind of friendly behavior for what to show while it's working. -- brion ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
Hoi, At the moment we have an upper limit of 100Mb. The people who do restorations have one file that is 680Mb.. The corresponding jpg is also quite big !! Thanks, GerardM 2009/4/24 Roan Kattouw roan.katt...@gmail.com 2009/4/24 Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.comsimetrical%2bwikil...@gmail.com : How long does it take to thumbnail a typical image, though? Even a parser cache hit (but Squid miss) will take hundreds of milliseconds to serve and hundreds of more milliseconds for network latency. If we're talking about each image adding 10 ms to the latency, then it's not worth it to add all this fancy asynchronous stuff. The problem here seems to be that thumbnail generation times vary a lot, based on format and size of the original image. It could be 10 ms for one image and 10 s for another, who knows. Moreover, in MediaWiki's case specifically, *very* few requests should actually require the thumbnailing. Only the first request for a given size of a given image should ever require thumbnailing: that can then be cached more or less forever. That's true, we're already doing that. So it's not a good case to optimize for. AFAICT this isn't about optimization, it's about not bogging down the Apache that has the misfortune of getting the first request to thumb a huge image (but having a dedicated server for that instead), and about not letting the associated user wait for ages. Even worse, requests that thumb very large images could hit the 30s execution limit and fail, which means those thumbs will never be generated but every user requesting it will have a request last for 30s and time out. Roan Kattouw (Catrope) ___ 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
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
Roan Kattouw wrote: The problem here seems to be that thumbnail generation times vary a lot, based on format and size of the original image. It could be 10 ms for one image and 10 s for another, who knows. yea again if we only issue the big resize operation on initial upload with a memory friendly in-place library like vips I think we will be oky. Since the user just waited like 10-15 minutes to upload their huge image waiting an additional 10-30s at that point for thumbnail and instant gratification of seeing your image on the upload page ... is not such a big deal. Then in-page use derivatives could predictably resize the 1024x786 ~or so~ image in realtime again instant gratification on page preview or page save. Operationally this could go out to a thumbnail server or be done on the apaches if they are small operations it may be easier to keep the existing infrastructure than to intelligently handle the edge cases outlined. ( many resize request at once, placeholders, image proxy / deamon setup) AFAICT this isn't about optimization, it's about not bogging down the Apache that has the misfortune of getting the first request to thumb a huge image (but having a dedicated server for that instead), and about not letting the associated user wait for ages. Even worse, requests that thumb very large images could hit the 30s execution limit and fail, which means those thumbs will never be generated but every user requesting it will have a request last for 30s and time out. Again this may be related to the use of unpredictable memory usage of image-magic when resizing large images instead of a fast memory confined resize engine, no? ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
Hoi, The library of Alexandria uses it for the display of their awesome Napoleontic lithographs.. It would be awesome if we had that code.. It is actually open source.. Thanks, Gerard 2009/4/24 David Gerard dger...@gmail.com 2009/4/24 Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.comsimetrical%2bwikil...@gmail.com : That's what occurred to me. In that case, the only possible thing to do seems to be to just have the image request wait until the image is thumbnailed. I guess you could show a placeholder image, but that's probably *less* friendly to the user, as long as we've specified the height and width in the HTML. The browser should provide some kind of placeholder already while the image is loading, after all, and if we let the browser provide the placeholder, then at least the image will appear automatically when it's done thumbnailing. There was a spec in earlier versions of HTML to put a low-res thumbnail up while the full image dribbled through your dialup - img lowsrc=image-placeholder.gif src=image.gif - but it was so little used (I know of no cases) that I don't know if it's even supported in browsers any more. http://www.htmlcodetutorial.com/images/_IMG_LOWSRC.html - d. ___ 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
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
On 4/24/09 11:05 AM, Michael Dale wrote: Roan Kattouw wrote: The problem here seems to be that thumbnail generation times vary a lot, based on format and size of the original image. It could be 10 ms for one image and 10 s for another, who knows. yea again if we only issue the big resize operation on initial upload with a memory friendly in-place library like vips I think we will be oky. Since the user just waited like 10-15 minutes to upload their huge image waiting an additional 10-30s at that point for thumbnail and instant gratification of seeing your image on the upload page ... is not such a big deal. Well, what about the 5 million other users browsing Special:Newimages? We don't want 50 simultaneous attempts to build that first über-thumbnail. :) -- brion ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
with a memory friendly in-place library like vips I think we will be oky. Since the user just waited like 10-15 minutes to upload their huge image waiting an additional 10-30s at that point for thumbnail and instant gratification of seeing your image on the upload page ... is not such a big deal. Well, what about the 5 million other users browsing Special:Newimages? We don't want 50 simultaneous attempts to build that first über-thumbnail. :) Thumbnail generation could be cascaded, i.e. 120px thumbs could be generated from the 800px previews instead of the original images. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Brion Vibber br...@wikimedia.org wrote: Best to make it explicit rather than presume -- currently we have no such locking for slow resizing requests. :) Yes, definitely. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
2009/4/24 Jacopo Corbetta jacopo.corbe...@gmail.com: An existing example of us providing users with such an option however can be seen in the ability to turn various editing-related gadgets such as wikiEd. I think this shows that should a more visual editing interface become able to be deployed, we certainly would make it optional. Exactly. Each editor has its own incompatible setting which allows it to be turned on or off. Basically, each extension assumes it is going to be the one and only one editor for the wiki. If you install more than one, things will break. A unified preference might have been useful. Anyway, no big deal. I don't believe any WYSIWYG (or close to) editor that exists for MediaWiki is good enough that you can completely avoid editing the wikitext directly (in order to do complicated stuff), that means you can't use one and only one editor unless that editor is the default wikitext editor. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
Keep in mind that when MediaWiki is developed, the best interests of Wikimedia are in mind. Wikimedia takes priority on MW development. X! On Apr 24, 2009, at 4:02 PM [Apr 24, 2009 ], Jacopo Corbetta wrote: Many wikis use MediaWiki beside Wikipedia. PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
Hoi, How much work do you think it will be to repair an extension that needs repair ? For someone who knows the code and for someone who just has to repair his one extension ?? Thanks, GerardM 2009/4/24 Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu How many non-WMF extensions will this break? On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Andrew Garrett agarr...@wikimedia.org wrote: I've branch-merged the new preferences system that I've spent the last few weeks developing. On the outside, you probably won't notice any difference except a few bugfixes, but the internals have undergone a complete rewrite. All of the actual preference definitions and utility functions have been separated out into Preferences.php, which holds all business logic for the new system. The UI and submission logic for the system is done in SpecialPreferences.php, which, now only a hundred lines long, wraps a generic class I've written to encourage separation of business and UI logic called 'HTMLForm'. The advantage of this clear separation is that writing an API module is very simple, and it can be called internally, too! Extensions must now hook GetPreferences instead of the existing hooks (which were too low-level to maintain compatibility with), I've updated all extensions used on Wikimedia. This new hook allows you to put preferences wherever you want, and a new preference can be added in less than ten lines of code, rather than the hundred-line nightmare that was required in the previous iteration. I'd like to look towards trimming some of the existing preferences that are no longer relevant, and adding new preferences as common sense dictates. Feedback, praise and criticism regarding the changes is certainly welcome! -- Andrew Garrett Sent from Sydney, Nsw, Australia ___ 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 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
I am just hoping to prevent a repeat of ParserPP. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.comsimetrical%2bwikil...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:23 PM, Soxred93 soxre...@gmail.com wrote: Keep in mind that when MediaWiki is developed, the best interests of Wikimedia are in mind. Wikimedia takes priority on MW development. Not as a general rule. If we really didn't care about third-party users, we'd require the very latest version of PHP (since Wikimedia uses it), write large chunks of the software in other languages (Wikipedia has Python installed), and so on. The suggestion to allow embedded Lua in templates seems not to be happening primarily because it would make Wikipedia content unusable by third parties on shared hosting. Although development of MediaWiki tends to focus primarily on Wikimedia's needs, it does *not* do so if that would significantly hurt MediaWiki's utility to third parties. Part of Wikimedia's goals is to make its content as useful as possible to third parties. That applies to MediaWiki insofar as it's a Wikimedia project, and doubly so insofar as it's needed to effectively use content from Wikimedia's other projects like Wikipedia. On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:25 PM, Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: What does this have to do with not horribly breaking many extensions at the same time? The WMF has cultivated an extension ecosystem and it makes sense to protect it. Do you have evidence that many extensions are, in fact, horribly broken? And if so, that they can't be easily fixed? ___ 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
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: I am just hoping to prevent a repeat of ParserPP. A *lot* more extensions use parser-related stuff than preferences. In any event, the upheaval of ParserPP was probably necessary given what it sought to achieve. That sort of thing happens from time to time -- it's not feasible for extensions with access to so many hooks and methods to just work forever. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
Michael Dale wrote: yea again if we only issue the big resize operation on initial upload with a memory friendly in-place library like vips I think we will be oky. Since the user just waited like 10-15 minutes to upload their huge image waiting an additional 10-30s at that point for thumbnail and instant gratification of seeing your image on the upload page ... is not such a big deal. It can be parallelized, starting rendering the thumb while the file hasn't been completely uploaded yet (most formats will allow to do that). That'd need special software, the easiest would be to use a different domain on Special:Upload action to the resizing cluster. These changes are always an annoyance but it would ease many bugs: 10976, 16751, 18202, upload bar, non-NFS backend... ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
Alex wrote: Extensions can add their own preferences more easily now. Adding a default preference to turn off a feature that doesn't yet exist in MediaWiki core doesn't make much sense. A preference name could be reserved to be consistently used by all alternate editors. Anyway, IMHO any alternate editor should offer an option to disable it directly on the edit page, regardless of a preference which would define don't appear by default. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
Also relevant: 17255 and 18201 And as this would be a new upload ssytem, also worth mentioning 18563 (new-upload branch) ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Google Summer of Code: accepted projects
On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 07:08:05PM +0100, David Gerard wrote:
There was a spec in earlier versions of HTML to put a low-res
thumbnail up while the full image dribbled through your dialup - img
lowsrc=image-placeholder.gif src=image.gif - but it was so little
used (I know of no cases) that I don't know if it's even supported in
browsers any more.
http://www.htmlcodetutorial.com/images/_IMG_LOWSRC.html
I tried it with FireFox 3.0.9 and IE 7.0.6001.18000; neither paid any
attention to it. IE 6.0.2800.1106 under Wine also ignored it. Too bad,
that would have been nice if it worked.
I don't know that we need fancy AJAX if we know at page rendering time
whether the image is available, though. We might be able to get away
with a simple script like this:
var ImageCache={};
function loadImage(id, url){
var i = document.getElementById(id);
if(i){
var img = new Image();
ImageCache[id] = img;
img.onload=function(){ i.src = url; ImageCache[id]=null; };
img.src = url;
}
}
And then generate the img tag with the placeholder and some id, and
call that function onload for it. Of course, if there are a lot of these
images on one page then we might run into the browser's concurrent
connection limit, which an AJAX solution might be able to overcome.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
APIs change in incompatible ways sometimes. When it's avoidable, that's great. Andrew seems to indicate that in this case, it wasn't possible to keep the hooks identical to how they were. That's why its best to keep extensions in svn so developers can easily spot and fix issues like this when they arise. -Chad On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 6:50 PM, Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: Whatever happened to object-oriented programming and abstraction? Why can't you define and provide a consistent API? On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 3:06 PM, Aryeh Gregor simetrical+wikil...@gmail.comsimetrical%2bwikil...@gmail.com wrote: On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 4:59 PM, Brian brian.min...@colorado.edu wrote: I am just hoping to prevent a repeat of ParserPP. A *lot* more extensions use parser-related stuff than preferences. In any event, the upheaval of ParserPP was probably necessary given what it sought to achieve. That sort of thing happens from time to time -- it's not feasible for extensions with access to so many hooks and methods to just work forever. ___ 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 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
On 4/24/09 4:38 PM, Alex wrote: While backwards compatibility is nice, if it stands in the way of improving something that needs improvement, the improvement should take priority Indeed - even Microsoft eventually abandoned Windows 3.1 compatibility... And more recently compatibility with all software in existence. - Trevor ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] New preferences system
On Sat, Apr 25, 2009 at 3:08 AM, Brion Vibber br...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 4/24/09 6:36 AM, Eugene Zelenko wrote: On Thu, Apr 23, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Andrew Garrettagarr...@wikimedia.org wrote: The advantage of this clear separation is that writing an API module is very simple, and it can be called internally, too! I think will be good idea to use API internally (not only have possibility to call), as result code will have more testing and coverage. Client-side JavaScript UI code can use the API to reach the backend, but I don't see much benefit to trying to use the API on the PHP UI end; it'll generally just be awkward. API code should rarely have to do any serious DB or processing work itself; it should be calling the backend model/controller-level interface. I mean, of course, that the back-end business logic interface can be called internally, not that the API can be called internally. -- Andrew Garrett ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
