On 6 April 2015 at 14:03, Ricordisamoa <[email protected]> wrote:
> Il 06/04/2015 02:18, Golden Ring ha scritto: > > I've been thinking recently about how to do recent changes patrol > better. I've prototyped a tool, which you can see > athttp://recent-changes.appspot.com/. > > > Nice. It reminds me of rech <https://tools.wmflabs.org/pltools/rech/>... > > Yes, very similar concept. Is there a reason that rech is wikidata only? > This is currently implemented on Google AppEngine, basically > becausethat's what I had to hand when I set out and already knew > something about using. It uses the MediaWiki API to retrieve diffs. > This is not ideal for a few reasons, not least because it wouldn't > take very heavy use of the tool before I'd have to start paying for > it, which would probably mean putting ads on it. I can't be dealing > with all that. > > > I suppose the cost is related to Google charging for bandwidth use beyond > a threshold? > Since the app needs JavaScript anyway, you could simply retrieve recent > changes on the client, thus avoiding much of the server-side traffic. > > Yes, Google charges for both CPU time and bandwidth use beyond the free quota (1GB bandwidth either way + 28 instance-hours per day). Retrieving changes from the client side was what I attempted first, but of course it has to be hosted somewhere, and unless that's on the wiki concerned, then you have to deal with the cross-site nature of the API requests. My impression is that this requires the wiki to be configured to explicitly allow requests from the domain serving the page. [snip] > Labs is precisely for external tools, and I'd say Tool Labs best fits your > needs. > To enhance MediaWiki's built-in patrolling functionality, you should read > this <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker> > instead. > Use your judgement and common sense > <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2014-October/075137.html> > to decide whether it's better to develop your tool on Tool Labs or as part > of MediaWiki (either core or an extension). > > I'm not absolutely clear on the best choice here. On one hand, I'd like the tool to end up something like Special:NewPagesFeed <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:NewPagesFeed>. I guess this points towards developing it as built-in mediawiki functionality, rather than an external tool. On the other hand, I've developed it because I actually want to use it; my impression is that getting changes into mediawiki, and then deployed onto en wikipedia, is not easy. Probably for pretty good reasons, but still not easy. If I go down the external tool route, then I guess the tool gets hosted at eg. tools.wmflabs.org; is that right? On the other hand, an external tool hosted there doesn't have access to the production wikipedia databases and would have to continue getting data through the mediawiki API; is that right? TBH I'm not sure I've got a lot of clue about the architecture of MediaWiki; is it described anywhere, beyond, "It uses PHP, MySQL and jQuery"? Sorry for having so many questions! Regards, GoldenRing >
_______________________________________________ Labs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/labs-l
