Hi all, your thoughts would be appreciated on
this. It would be great to get some input from tech-focused contributors. I
started the thread only on Wikimedia-l to keep the discussion
consolidated in one place.
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-May/071811.html
Thanks,
I said this during the retrospective about beta features. I think all beta
features should be enabled for all logged in users the month before they
get deployed. Let's not resort to banners please.
Let's instead train people to go to the beta features page and help us
build great products that
I'm getting the impression there is a fundamental misunderstanding here.
Am 18.05.2014 04:28, schrieb Subramanya Sastry:
So, consider this wikitext for page P.
== Foo ==
{{wikitext-transclusion}}
*a1
map .. ... /map
*a2
{{T}} (the html-content-model-transclusion)
*a3
Parsoid
On May 18, 2014 9:36 PM, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote:
tbh -dev (or somewhere else) should be the master channel for bz output.
The somewhere else is #mediawiki-feed with master feeds for both gerrit and
bugzilla.
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
On 05/16/2014 07:11 PM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
http://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1lid=1816670,2147714,1277333,5128581h=1816670date=2014-5-19sln=19-20
I will be in #wikimedia-dev on Monday for an hour to talk about the
performance guidelines
[x-posted]
Hello,
The Wikimedia Language Engineering team will be hosting the next
monthly IRC office hour on Wednesday, May 21 2014 at 1700 UTC on
#wikimedia-office. The event is delayed this month as the team was
traveling.
In this office hour we will be discussing about our recent work,
On 05/19/2014 06:30 AM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
On 05/16/2014 07:11 PM, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
http://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1lid=1816670,2147714,1277333,5128581h=1816670date=2014-5-19sln=19-20
I will be in #wikimedia-dev on Monday for an hour to talk about the
performance
On 05/19/2014 04:52 AM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
I'm getting the impression there is a fundamental misunderstanding here.
You are correct. I completely misunderstood what you said in your last
response about expandtemplates. So, the rest of my response to your last
email is irrelevant ... and
On 19 May 2014 03:49, Jon Robson jdlrob...@gmail.com wrote:
I said this during the retrospective about beta features. I think all beta
features should be enabled for all logged in users the month before they
get deployed. Let's not resort to banners please.
This is a much better idea than
On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 08:22:13PM +0200, Rainer Rillke wrote:
Yeah, that would be cool: I am tool x, I do y and you can disable me
pressing button z. Let button z be a prominent element of the UI for
the time of testing at large scale.
For the record, we did the first part of this - there was
Am 19.05.2014 14:21, schrieb Subramanya Sastry:
On 05/19/2014 04:52 AM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
I'm getting the impression there is a fundamental misunderstanding here.
You are correct. I completely misunderstood what you said in your last
response
about expandtemplates. So, the rest of my
Hi,
On 01/18/2014 03:42 AM, Matthew Walker wrote:
We've just finished our second sprint on the new PDF renderer. A
significant chunk of renderer development time this cycle was on non latin
script support, as well as puppetization and packaging for deployment. We
have a work in progress
On 05/19/2014 09:52 AM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 18.05.2014 16:29, schrieb Gabriel Wicke:
The difference between wrapper and property is actually that using inline
wrappers in the returned wikitext would force us to escape similar wrappers
from normal template content to avoid opening a gaping
On 05/19/2014 04:54 PM, Gabriel Wicke wrote:
The move to HTML-based (self-contained) transclusions expansions will avoid
this issue completely. That's a few months out though. Maybe we can find a
stop-gap solution that moves in that direction, without introducing special
tags in
On 05/19/2014 10:19 AM, Gabriel Wicke wrote:
On 05/19/2014 04:54 PM, Gabriel Wicke wrote:
The move to HTML-based (self-contained) transclusions expansions will avoid
this issue completely. That's a few months out though. Maybe we can find a
stop-gap solution that moves in that direction,
On 05/19/2014 10:55 AM, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote:
I am kind of lost in this discussion, but let me just ask one question.
Won't all of the proposed solutions, other than the one of just not
expanding transclusions that can't be expanded to wikitext, break the
original and primary purpose of
I am kind of lost in this discussion, but let me just ask one question.
Won't all of the proposed solutions, other than the one of just not expanding
transclusions that can't be expanded to wikitext, break the original and
primary purpose of ExpandTemplates: providing valid parsable wikitext,
That's a good question! I'm in SFO this week, so it's probably worth
setting aside a day to resync and figure out what the next steps for
the new PDF renderer are.
--scott
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Am 19.05.2014 20:01, schrieb Gabriel Wicke:
On 05/19/2014 10:55 AM, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote:
I am kind of lost in this discussion, but let me just ask one question.
Won't all of the proposed solutions, other than the one of just not
expanding transclusions that can't be expanded to wikitext,
On 05/19/2014 12:46 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote:
Am 19.05.2014 20:01, schrieb Gabriel Wicke:
On 05/19/2014 10:55 AM, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote:
I am kind of lost in this discussion, but let me just ask one question.
Won't all of the proposed solutions, other than the one of just not
expanding
Hi everyone,
I'm trying to figure out the reason behind some decisions that were made in
the past about bot flags to see if we can have a more optimal and clear
setup.
Presently, giving an account the bot flag does two things:
1. When editing via the API, allows the user to choose whether or
Actually there are a few cases in the non API where bots can assert not
being a bot, and there are some cases where non-bots can flag as bots for
specific cases (I know it in the past it was used to suppress RC floods of
mass vandalism reverts by admins) so your picture isnt complete
On Mon, May
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
1. When editing via the API, allows the user to choose whether or not to
flag an edit as a bot edit using the bot parameter.
I'm responsible for this part of the mess. I don't remember why it was
done this way though. I
Can you help me out and tell me what those cases are? I've been editing for
nine years and not stumbled upon them, so I'm very curious.
Thanks,
Dan
On 19 May 2014 19:13, John phoenixoverr...@gmail.com wrote:
Actually there are a few cases in the non API where bots can assert not
being a bot,
Sorry, I mean, can you tell me specifically how that's done? I don't know
that.
Thanks,
Dan
On 19 May 2014 19:33, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Can you help me out and tell me what those cases are? I've been editing
for nine years and not stumbled upon them, so I'm very curious.
As a bot operator I think API parameter about flagging bot or not is
necessary but I think the best solution would be having something like
flag=1 (optional) and this causes bot edits to be marked as human and for
admin (+flooders) edits marked as bot.
Implementing the parameter (whether the
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Can you help me out and tell me what those cases are? I've been editing for
nine years and not stumbled upon them, so I'm very curious.
If you are a sysop, you can either add bot=1 to a rollback URL by hand
(unlike most
Admins have the ability to mark their rollbacks as bot edits? Wow, that's
fascinating. Talk about edge cases.
Thanks Gergő!
Dan
On 19 May 2014 19:51, Gergo Tisza gti...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 4:33 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Can you help me out and tell
On 19 May 2014 19:36, Amir Ladsgroup ladsgr...@gmail.com wrote:
As a bot operator I think API parameter about flagging bot or not is
necessary
Sure, but as I'm not a bot operator, can you explain why and what you use
this for, to help me understand? :-)
Implementing the parameter (whether
On May 20, 2014 8:39 AM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 19 May 2014 19:36, Amir Ladsgroup ladsgr...@gmail.com wrote:
As a bot operator I think API parameter about flagging bot or not is
necessary
Sure, but as I'm not a bot operator, can you explain why and what you use
this
Because humans use it these days, not boys generally in the web interface
and it would just make stuff harder for people that use it…
On Tuesday, May 20, 2014, John Mark Vandenberg jay...@gmail.com wrote:
On May 20, 2014 8:39 AM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org javascript:;
wrote:
On 19 May
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 3:39 AM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 19 May 2014 19:36, Amir Ladsgroup ladsgr...@gmail.com wrote:
As a bot operator I think API parameter about flagging bot or not is
necessary
Sure, but as I'm not a bot operator, can you explain why and what you use
Hi, a few of us had an offline discussion about getting university professors
to encourage their students to publish code that they develop for classes based
on MediaWiki and Wikimedia projects. What I heard is that professors are using
MW and Wikimedia projects as environments for student devs
33 matches
Mail list logo
