Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
Daniel, On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:33 PM, Daniel Zahn dz...@wikimedia.org wrote: BTW, why is WMF looking for a WordPress Developer? So is it just design or is it developing? If it is actual software development, i'd have to think who is going to review and maintain that code after the super short-term contractor is gone. The changes to the plugins and themes that would happen (have happenend) are and would continue to be in gerrit code review. Communications wants to simply update existing install, and while I can review, I don't really have time to code (or if I code, I can't self-review). This would most likely be in the form of an update of the existing custom plugin and a new theme (to replace Victor). Remember it also has to be deployed to production somehow and i'd already like to point out now that it should have reviews from other devs, not just asking ops to merge it, especially with Wordpress' history of exploits. The blog is already deployed in production (by you and RobH), so I assume you've firewalled it already as much as possible, so the main concern if exploited would would be privacy leak from *.wikimedia.org As for updating it, I'm open to ideas on how we can handle this. I can ask around in Features for someone willing to help. Right now the process is ad hoc and ends up being a pain to keep up to date from Ops's side (basically someone notices the plugins and core are out of date and requests an update). ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
On Mar 19, 2013, at 7:06 PM, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote: We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that. MediaWiki + LQT (or the likes) for the comments and you are basically there. In addition you have less to worry about in regards to the WordpRess exploits (as pointed out by Daniel) and you open up to a whole new ecocycle of developers we already have. That's an interesting idea (after all, WordPress and MediaWiki's are redundant CMSs), and it would fix some annoying issues of the blog workflow (signon for commenting/publishing, and the redundant cycle comm takes on drafting on wiki and translating for WordPress), but it sounds like a larger scope of work than a temporary WordPress contractor (and a longer review cycle). I can't commit that much resources out of Features for anything beyond reviews of tweaks to the blog and Communications budget for developing this is very modest. Are you suggesting that we add this to next fiscal year's plan and repurpose one of our teams for this? Right now I'm assuming the priorities of Visual Editor, Parsoid, Editor Engagement (Echo, Flow), and E3 take precedence and are pretty much set well into 2013-14. If I had extra room, I'd probably prioritize global profile and affiliations/wikiprojects support moving the blog to MediaWiki. :-( terry chay 최태리 Director of Features Engineering Wikimedia Foundation “Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment.” p: +1 (415) 839-6885 x6832 m: +1 (408) 480-8902 e: tc...@wikimedia.org i: http://terrychay.com/ w: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tychay aim: terrychay ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
On 20 March 2013 02:06, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote: We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that. MediaWiki + LQT (or the likes) for the comments and you are basically there. In addition you have less to worry about in regards to the WordpRess exploits (as pointed out by Daniel) and you open up to a whole new ecocycle of developers we already have. Cobbling together blog software is a one-man project; having a versatile, well-maintained and mature blog engine with ubiquitous third-party support is another matter. You could turn WordPress into an encyclopedia CMS too, but it would be well below optimum. WordPress has all manner of problems (I am painfully aware of this, I have to hit it with a hammer in my day job) but it is basically the best available for the job. MediaWiki has all manner of problems (you are painfully aware of this, I'm certain) but, similarly, there's nothing better for the job. It's possible we could do better with something adapted, but not from MediaWiki. For one thing, WordPress's visual editor works ... - d. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
On the other hand, how hard could it be to just write an extension to integrate a wordpress database and interface into a mediawiki? Call it a new namespace on the mediawiki end, and... uh... horrible things on the wordpress end... I was going to say that if I had enough spare time I could probably pull that off, but putting this down in text it now occurs to me how utterly insane that is, especially considering how hard a time I had just making my own wordpress and mediawiki installs look the same. Even so, it definitely could be done, and it'd probably be easier to maintain and update than making something from scratch. I mean, they're both php, with somewhat similar structures... On 20/03/13 18:57, David Gerard wrote: On 20 March 2013 02:06, K. Peachey p858sn...@gmail.com wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Jay Walsh jwa...@wikimedia.org wrote: We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that. MediaWiki + LQT (or the likes) for the comments and you are basically there. In addition you have less to worry about in regards to the WordpRess exploits (as pointed out by Daniel) and you open up to a whole new ecocycle of developers we already have. Cobbling together blog software is a one-man project; having a versatile, well-maintained and mature blog engine with ubiquitous third-party support is another matter. You could turn WordPress into an encyclopedia CMS too, but it would be well below optimum. WordPress has all manner of problems (I am painfully aware of this, I have to hit it with a hammer in my day job) but it is basically the best available for the job. MediaWiki has all manner of problems (you are painfully aware of this, I'm certain) but, similarly, there's nothing better for the job. It's possible we could do better with something adapted, but not from MediaWiki. For one thing, WordPress's visual editor works ... - d. - d. ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- -— Isarra ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: On the other hand, how hard could it be to just write an extension to integrate a wordpress database and interface into a mediawiki? Call it a new namespace on the mediawiki end, and... uh... horrible things on the wordpress end... I was going to say that if I had enough spare time I could probably pull that off, but putting this down in text it now occurs to me how utterly insane that is, especially considering how hard a time I had just making my own wordpress and mediawiki installs look the same. Even so, it definitely could be done, and it'd probably be easier to maintain and update than making something from scratch. I mean, they're both php, with somewhat similar structures... I actually don't think it would be. Mediawiki is an awesome tool for many things but we really shouldn't be using it for things it isn't good for/meant for. Wordpress is a very good, modular, option for bogs in particular and is, in my opinion, a perfectly acceptable thing to use for that. In order to have any good design setup for the blog on mediawiki we would have to be using a fair bit of rawhtml (something that mediawiki allows but was never really meant for) and very complicated templates. We would also need to have a much more understandable comment system then mediawiki has right now. Liquid threads isn't meant for this type of conversation, mediawiki itself sucks horribly for a comment type system and while flow type stuff may be helpful it is down the road and not really in scope currently from my understanding. In order to make it flexible enough for those running the blog on the front end (Staff / Volunteers etc) we would have to make it relatively easy to understand that rawhtml/template system at least at some level which is, in my opinion, too much to ask of them. They should be focused on what they are writing and other work, not trying to work around the page itself. Our current visual editor is also unlikely to be workable with that complicated of a template system in any near future. It would create an enormous amount of complication for something that doesn't need it. Dogfooding our product is great but shouldnt' be done just because it should be done where the product makes sense for the task. James James Alexander Manager, Merchandise Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
On 20/03/13 21:09, James Alexander wrote: On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: On the other hand, how hard could it be to just write an extension to integrate a wordpress database and interface into a mediawiki? Call it a new namespace on the mediawiki end, and... uh... horrible things on the wordpress end... I was going to say that if I had enough spare time I could probably pull that off, but putting this down in text it now occurs to me how utterly insane that is, especially considering how hard a time I had just making my own wordpress and mediawiki installs look the same. Even so, it definitely could be done, and it'd probably be easier to maintain and update than making something from scratch. I mean, they're both php, with somewhat similar structures... I actually don't think it would be. Mediawiki is an awesome tool for many things but we really shouldn't be using it for things it isn't good for/meant for. Wordpress is a very good, modular, option for bogs in particular and is, in my opinion, a perfectly acceptable thing to use for that. In order to have any good design setup for the blog on mediawiki we would have to be using a fair bit of rawhtml (something that mediawiki allows but was never really meant for) and very complicated templates. We would also need to have a much more understandable comment system then mediawiki has right now. Liquid threads isn't meant for this type of conversation, mediawiki itself sucks horribly for a comment type system and while flow type stuff may be helpful it is down the road and not really in scope currently from my understanding. In order to make it flexible enough for those running the blog on the front end (Staff / Volunteers etc) we would have to make it relatively easy to understand that rawhtml/template system at least at some level which is, in my opinion, too much to ask of them. They should be focused on what they are writing and other work, not trying to work around the page itself. Our current visual editor is also unlikely to be workable with that complicated of a template system in any near future. It would create an enormous amount of complication for something that doesn't need it. Dogfooding our product is great but shouldnt' be done just because it should be done where the product makes sense for the task. James James Alexander Manager, Merchandise Wikimedia Foundation (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l MediaWiki is good for revision control and some forms of categorisation and has all our users. Wordpress works for blog displaying and organising pages and tagging stuff and generally throwing it at the readers. What I am suggesting would take both of those, stuff the -admin interface and editing and revisions into mediawiki, but have wordpress handle the content and displaying it to readers (just dealing with the current revisions on that end)... in a mediawiki skin, even, and then... well, explode, probably. I dunno, if it didn't explode I know plenty of folks who would use this, but it probably wouldn't actually help Wikimedia that much, considering what they're apparently looking for specifically. -- -— Isarra ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: Dogfooding our product is great but shouldnt' be done just because it should be done where the product makes sense for the task. Supporting more flexible designs - particularly in the realm of extensions - would be good for Mediawiki in the long term, however. MediaWiki is good for revision control and some forms of categorisation and has all our users. Wordpress works for blog displaying and organising pages and tagging stuff and generally throwing it at the readers. What I am suggesting would take both of those, stuff the -admin interface and editing and revisions into mediawiki, but have wordpress handle the content and displaying it to readers (just dealing with the current revisions on that end)... in a mediawiki skin, even, and then... well, explode, probably. I dunno, if it didn't explode I know plenty of folks who would use this, but it probably wouldn't actually help Wikimedia that much, considering what they're apparently looking for specifically. And there are already extensions such as http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WPMW and http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WordPress_Comments ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
Platonides wrote: On 19/03/13 00:54, Sumana Harihareswara wrote: Oh, and I noticed that you have some OTRS expertise -- could you maybe check out https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22622 and let us know if you have some free time to volunteer your help? :-) Is it really something where volunteers can help? I thought it wasn't possible (private mail concerns blocking volunteer action). BTW, why is WMF looking for a WordPress Developer? I think that if we outgrew the current blog, the way to go would be to mediawikize it, not to make something new still based in WP. O. It kind of stings to read http://hire.jobvite.com/Jobvite/Job.aspx?j=ou3gXfwu, apparently a position listing from the Legal and Community Advocacy team, looking for a WordPress contractor to do a face-lift for the Wikimedia blog, when OTRS is struggling to stay functional. I don't do much OTRS-related work, but I find it easy to imagine some OTRS volunteers reading this and wondering what's going on. MZMcBride ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 3:35 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote: Platonides wrote: On 19/03/13 00:54, Sumana Harihareswara wrote: Oh, and I noticed that you have some OTRS expertise -- could you maybe check out https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22622 and let us know if you have some free time to volunteer your help? :-) Is it really something where volunteers can help? I thought it wasn't possible (private mail concerns blocking volunteer action). BTW, why is WMF looking for a WordPress Developer? I think that if we outgrew the current blog, the way to go would be to mediawikize it, not to make something new still based in WP. O. It kind of stings to read http://hire.jobvite.com/Jobvite/Job.aspx?j=ou3gXfwu, apparently a position listing from the Legal and Community Advocacy team, looking for a WordPress contractor to do a face-lift for the Wikimedia blog, when OTRS is struggling to stay functional. I don't do much OTRS-related work, but I find it easy to imagine some OTRS volunteers reading this and wondering what's going on. MZMcBride Hi MZ - I don't disagree with the points about OTRS. I don't know the software/interface well and can't speak to the resources needed to address it, but I can speak to the wordpress post. To be clear, this is really intended to be a super short-term work contract. It's not a regular job, and not even part time. We've budgeted a small amount of money for this work, and most of that is to implement the updated designs that we've had for a while, which are focused on showcasing a wider number of topic areas, more multilingual posts, and more involvement from the community. We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that. -- Jay Walsh Senior Director, Communications WikimediaFoundation.org blog.wikimedia.org +1 (415) 839 6885 x 6609, @jansonw ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF
BTW, why is WMF looking for a WordPress Developer? So is it just design or is it developing? If it is actual software development, i'd have to think who is going to review and maintain that code after the super short-term contractor is gone. Remember it also has to be deployed to production somehow and i'd already like to point out now that it should have reviews from other devs, not just asking ops to merge it, especially with Wordpress' history of exploits. -- Daniel Zahn dz...@wikimedia.org Operations Engineer ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
