Re: [Wikitech-l] Drop support for PHP 5.3
On 20/02/14 05:17, Jamie Thingelstad wrote: Regarding PHP 5.3 support, I put together a quick report in WikiApiary showing the versions of PHP in use across wikis. https://wikiapiary.com/wiki/PHP_Versions In short, 5.3 is the most common PHP version used by a large, large majority. Three things to footnote in this data (and you could run additional queries to get the real data for these). 1. WMF itself runs PHP 5.3, so that explodes the user count a lot. If you excluded WMF (based on an assumption that WMF controls it so thus could move to newer version easily) it lowers the active users on 5.3 dramatically. 2. A large percentage of the 5.3 install base is there because that is what Ubuntu is distributing (my farm is on 5.3 for this reason). If there was an easy PPA solution to move from 5.3 to 5.4 for Ubuntu 12.04 that would also lessen the dependency on 5.3. FWIW, the next long-term support (LTS) version of Ubuntu is due on 17 April this year. It ships with PHP 5.5. This would be the Ubuntu version that hosters would want to upgrade to. However, the previous LTS version will still be supported until April 2017, so there is no urge for people to upgrade. Cheers, Markus 3. If you queried by Netblock you could identify how many of these 5.3 users are on Bluehost, Dreamhost or other system where they have no ability to upgrade, the hosted would have to do that. All data (except time series edit data) for WikiApiary is stored as semantic properties, so all of these things are available for #ask queries. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
ICANN just delegated the gTLD .WIKI yesterday. It's being managed by Top Level Design, LLC. I'm not entirely sure what that means for all of us exactly, but I suspect that the WMF is going to want to at least register Wikipedia.wiki and Wikimedia.wiki once the gTLD is open for registration. Some of the new gTLDs are already opening up for registration. .sexy and .tattoo will be opening for registration on 25 February. It looks like if we want to get .wiki domains we will be getting them sometime in May or June during the sunrise period.[1] ICANN also has a full list of new gTLDs that they have approved.[2] Thank you, Derric Atzrott Computer Specialist Alizee Pathology [1]: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/newtlds/tld/WIKI [2]: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] How to install MediaWiki via Vagrant
http://honeycoding.wordpress.com/2014/02/20/mediawiki-vagrant-is-tough-to-be-tamed-in-your-local-machine/ Charul is an OPW intern with Fedora working on infrastructure visualization (the Datagrepper/Dataviewer project). Charul: thanks for the post! If you have any improvements for https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki-Vagrantplease go ahead and add them! Sumana Harihareswara Engineering Community Manager Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
On Feb 20, 2014 1:57 PM, Derric Atzrott datzr...@alizeepathology.com wrote: ICANN just delegated the gTLD .WIKI yesterday. It's being managed by Top Level Design, LLC. I'm not entirely sure what that means for all of us exactly, but I suspect that the WMF is going to want to at least register Wikipedia.wiki and Wikimedia.wiki once the gTLD is open for registration. I believe they were at Wikimania this past summer and we've definitely been in contact with them for some time now. -Jeremy ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
On 02/20/2014 10:56 AM, Derric Atzrott wrote: I'm not entirely sure what that means for all of us exactly, but I suspect that the WMF is going to want to at least register Wikipedia.wiki and Wikimedia.wiki once the gTLD is open for registration. I'm not even sure media.wiki is a good idea, but here goes the thought. -- Quim Gil Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
We've been in discussions with Top Level Design, both to look into potentially appropriate uses (e.g. URL shorteners) and to prevent squatting of WMF trademarks. James points out that now there's .foundation there's some additional potential for mischief :P. Damn TLDs sprouting like mushrooms .. -- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
I got permission from Reuben Smith of wikihow and WMF release manager Greg Grossmeier to re-post this exchange. Sumana Harihareswara Engineering Community Manager Wikimedia Foundation Reuben Smith of wikiHow asked: We're having a hard time figuring out whether we should be basing our wikiHow code off Mediawiki's external releases (such as the latest 1.22.2), or off the branches that WMF uses for their internal infrastructure (latest looks to be wmf/1.23wmf14). Do you have any thoughts of guidance on that? We're leaning towards moving to using the WMF internal branches, since we use MySQL as well, but I wanted to hear from different people about the drawbacks. Greg Grossmeier responded: The quick answer is: Feel free to base it off of either. There shouldn't be any WMF-specific things in those wmfXX branches. If there is, it is a commit called something like Commit of various WMF live hacks. That one commit can be safely reverted. The wmfXX branches are made every week on Thursday morning (Pacific) before we deploy. As we get closer to the next release (1.23) the MediaWiki Release Managers (our outside contractors, Mark and Markus, not myself) will pick a wmfXX to call a Release Candidate. Going with a 1.22.x would give you stability at the loss of getting fixes faster and it means a bigger upgrade task when 1.23 is out. Summary: If you want to keep closer to WMF, pick a wmfXX branch (this assumes you'll follow at some pace behind WMF). If you don't want to be that bleeding edge, stick with 1.22.x. Hope that helps, Greg PS: To learn more about our deploy cycle, see: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Deployments/One_week PPS: To see where we are at any given point, wrt MediaWiki, see: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki_1.23/Roadmap#Schedule_for_the_deployments; ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
It's worth noting that WMF branches also include temporary hacks to keep current JS/CSS and cached HTML output compatible (for at least 30 days), while release branches never contain them (and thus require HTML caches to be purged during the upgrade process). This usually only affects changes to the Vector skin which is not the default there (I'm not sure if it's even available), but nevertheless wikiHow might prefer one of these depending on how their caching layer is set up. -- Matma Rex ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
TLD proliferation is a scam by money-hungry registrars who want people to register (and thus pay) in multiple TLDs to protect their brands. I recommend we boycott/ignore these various things and just avoid them, but I know we're going to end up registering a bunch for the brand protection (racket). -- brion On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:56 AM, Derric Atzrott datzr...@alizeepathology.com wrote: ICANN just delegated the gTLD .WIKI yesterday. It's being managed by Top Level Design, LLC. I'm not entirely sure what that means for all of us exactly, but I suspect that the WMF is going to want to at least register Wikipedia.wiki and Wikimedia.wiki once the gTLD is open for registration. Some of the new gTLDs are already opening up for registration. .sexy and .tattoo will be opening for registration on 25 February. It looks like if we want to get .wiki domains we will be getting them sometime in May or June during the sunrise period.[1] ICANN also has a full list of new gTLDs that they have approved.[2] Thank you, Derric Atzrott Computer Specialist Alizee Pathology [1]: http://www.namejet.com/Pages/newtlds/tld/WIKI [2]: http://newgtlds.icann.org/en/program-status/delegated-strings ___ 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] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
On 20/02/14 21:32, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote: It's worth noting that WMF branches also include temporary hacks to keep current JS/CSS and cached HTML output compatible (for at least 30 days), while release branches never contain them (and thus require HTML caches to be purged during the upgrade process). This usually only affects changes to the Vector skin which is not the default there (I'm not sure if it's even available), but nevertheless wikiHow might prefer one of these depending on how their caching layer is set up. If wikiHow's setup is sufficiently different, it might be worth considering making their own branches from the master - test and fix things from what was the current master, deploy it, move the test up to the new master, and repeat. This would do the same as with the wmf branches to avoid a lot of the usual difficulty involved in upgrading, but could perhaps also be tailored to be more specific to the systems wikiHow uses. It would require pretty consistent maintenance of their own, but it could be worth it. -I ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] Decisions on HTML templating + Service Oriented Architecture (was Re: RFC review this Friday: HTML templating + Service Oriented Architecture)
On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Sumana Harihareswara suma...@wikimedia.org wrote: This week, we're mostly discussing the HTML templating and SOA RFCs - https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_Summit_2014/HTML_templatingand https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Services_and_narrow_interfaces have more information. Gabriel Wicke will be asking for some decisions on both. :) Hi Gabriel, Could you spell out on the mailing list what decisions you are hoping we make on these two (or if this overstated your expectations for tomorrow)? Rob ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 9:53 PM, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote: It would require pretty consistent maintenance of their own, but it could be worth it. IOW, you need to hire a Greg Grossmeier :) -Jeremy ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
On 02/20/2014 04:51 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: TLD proliferation is a scam by money-hungry registrars who want people to register (and thus pay) in multiple TLDs to protect their brands. Well, the ostensible pretext is that .com. is now ridiculously overloaded with myovercomplicateddomain.com because all the meaningful short names are taken, and this is supposed to allow you to register in the right TLD only. Of course, that's not going to happen in practice as every TLD will be populated by all the people with .com domains for that reason. *sigh* Back in the days when I had hack.com, I refused to pay money for it to Internic when they started to charge money (thanks, PG!) as a sign of protest. Fat lot of good that did me -- or the dns. -- Marc ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Decisions on HTML templating + Service Oriented Architecture (was Re: RFC review this Friday: HTML templating + Service Oriented Architecture)
On 02/20/2014 01:55 PM, Rob Lanphier wrote: On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Sumana Harihareswara suma...@wikimedia.org mailto:suma...@wikimedia.org wrote: This week, we're mostly discussing the HTML templating and SOA RFCs - https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_Summit_2014/HTML_templating and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Services_and_narrow_interfaces have more information. Gabriel Wicke will be asking for some decisions on both. :) Hi Gabriel, Could you spell out on the mailing list what decisions you are hoping we make on these two (or if this overstated your expectations for tomorrow)? It certainly overstates my expectations a bit. As mentioned yesterday, I could imagine discussing packaging and distribution. It would be great if Faidon was present, and I asked him if he has time. He was busy though, so I don't know definitely if he'll be there. (This is the bit that Sumana billed as SOA.) HTML templating is now fairly far along, and I'd like to get feedback on the next steps. Matt me will post to the list about that today. Gabriel ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
quote name=Bartosz Dz. date=2014-02-20 time=22:32:42 +0100 It's worth noting that WMF branches also include temporary hacks to keep current JS/CSS and cached HTML output compatible (for at least 30 days), while release branches never contain them (and thus require HTML caches to be purged during the upgrade process). Isn't that: Feel free to base it off of either. There shouldn't be any WMF-specific things in those wmfXX branches. If there is, it is a commit called something like Commit of various WMF live hacks. That one commit can be safely reverted. eg: https://git.wikimedia.org/commit/mediawiki%2Fcore.git/a868d086b68f05e7f93727dfb992c3f59c0525cf Greg -- | Greg GrossmeierGPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @gregA18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D | ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 1:20 PM, Sumana Harihareswara suma...@wikimedia.org wrote: Reuben Smith of wikiHow asked: We're having a hard time figuring out whether we should be basing our wikiHow code off Mediawiki's external releases (such as the latest 1.22.2), or off the branches that WMF uses for their internal infrastructure (latest looks to be wmf/1.23wmf14). Do you have any thoughts of guidance on that? We're leaning towards moving to using the WMF internal branches, since we use MySQL as well, but I wanted to hear from different people about the drawbacks. Greg Grossmeier responded: The quick answer is: Feel free to base it off of either. There shouldn't be any WMF-specific things in those wmfXX branches. If there is, it is a commit called something like Commit of various WMF live hacks. That one commit can be safely reverted. The wmfXX branches are made every week on Thursday morning (Pacific) before we deploy. As we get closer to the next release (1.23) the MediaWiki Release Managers (our outside contractors, Mark and Markus, not myself) will pick a wmfXX to call a Release Candidate. Going with a 1.22.x would give you stability at the loss of getting fixes faster and it means a bigger upgrade task when 1.23 is out. Summary: If you want to keep closer to WMF, pick a wmfXX branch (this assumes you'll follow at some pace behind WMF). If you don't want to be that bleeding edge, stick with 1.22.x. Note that unless you're willing to keep up to date with WMF's relatively fast pace of branching, you're going to miss security updates. No matter what, if you use git you're going to get security updates slower, since they are released into the tarballs first, then merged into master, then branches (is this accurate?). Sometimes the current WMF branch won't even get the security updates since they are already merged locally onto Wikimedia's deployment server. That said, due to the poor state of extension management in MediaWiki, the only reasonable way to manage MediaWiki is to use the WMF branches since they handle dependencies for the most popular extensions. I was hoping that composer would make managing extensions easier, but I've been tracking it in SMW and it's actually making things more difficult. - Ryan ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] [Design] Should MediaWiki CSS prefer non-free fonts?
On 02/15/2014 09:07 PM, Ryan Kaldari wrote: Frankly, I think there has been a large degree of intransigence on both sides. The free font advocates have refused to identify the fonts that I still miss an answer to http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/design/2013-December/001285.html I don't want to repeat the points again, but let me summarize the root of all the arguments against the specification of proprietary fonts: Fonts are software, fonts are creative works. As a matter of principle, Wikimedia doesn't use or promote proprietary software and proprietary creative works for our sites. There should be a very good reason to propose an exception to this principle. Those proposing the typography change are putting a lot of effort and the best of their intentions in offering the best solution for the branches and leaves of this project. However, what is being questioned here is the root, Wikimedia selecting explicitly proprietary fonts that will become a core visual element of Wikipedia's language. [1] [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Typography_refresh#Goals -- Quim Gil Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 23:21:37 +0100, Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org wrote: quote name=Bartosz Dz. date=2014-02-20 time=22:32:42 +0100 It's worth noting that WMF branches also include temporary hacks to keep current JS/CSS and cached HTML output compatible (for at least 30 days), while release branches never contain them (and thus require HTML caches to be purged during the upgrade process). Isn't that: Feel free to base it off of either. There shouldn't be any WMF-specific things in those wmfXX branches. If there is, it is a commit called something like Commit of various WMF live hacks. That one commit can be safely reverted. eg: https://git.wikimedia.org/commit/mediawiki%2Fcore.git/a868d086b68f05e7f93727dfb992c3f59c0525cf Nope, I mean different hacks (that people generally don't bother ops/deployers with), like the ones being removed by https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/61075/ or https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/72151/ or https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/102492/ or https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/82102/ . They are required because (to simplify) generated page HTML (which is cached for up to 30 days on our cluster) includes links to autoupdating JS and CSS code. Thus any JS/CSS changes need to be compatible with older generated HTML. -- Matma Rex ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
quote name=Ryan Lane date=2014-02-20 time=14:37:01 -0800 Note that unless you're willing to keep up to date with WMF's relatively fast pace of branching, you're going to miss security updates. No matter what, if you use git you're going to get security updates slower, since they are released into the tarballs first, then merged into master, then branches (is this accurate?). Sometimes the current WMF branch won't even get the security updates since they are already merged locally onto Wikimedia's deployment server. That's a good point, with one small clarification/rewording: Someone who's following wmfXX branches will get the security fixes the next branch after the tarball is released. That's usually with in the working week (we tend to release tarballs on Mon/Tues, with new branches on Thursday). So, yes, if you're pacing behind on the wmfXX branches, you'll want to take note of security releases and backport patches as appropriate (all security bugs have single patches attached to the Bugzilla report, and those are made public after the tarball is released). Greg -- | Greg GrossmeierGPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @gregA18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D | ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] Lower-resolution .ogv video transcodes coming
I've taken the liberty of enabling[1] lower-resolution .ogv video transcodes, at 360p and 160p in addition to the 480p we already generated. [1] https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=61690 These will be useful for older or slower or mobile machines which need to use non-native software decoding fallbacks (such as the existing Java applet, or the JavaScript or Flash alternatives I'm working on in research time) and may not be able to decode a full 480p file made from an SD or HD video original. Files should gradually populate at the smaller sizes as they get referenced and the new sizes are automatically added to the transcoding queue. Please give a shout if there's any problems. -- brion ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
On 2014-02-20 2:50 PM, Bartosz Dziewoński wrote: On Thu, 20 Feb 2014 23:21:37 +0100, Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org wrote: quote name=Bartosz Dz. date=2014-02-20 time=22:32:42 +0100 It's worth noting that WMF branches also include temporary hacks to keep current JS/CSS and cached HTML output compatible (for at least 30 days), while release branches never contain them (and thus require HTML caches to be purged during the upgrade process). Isn't that: Feel free to base it off of either. There shouldn't be any WMF-specific things in those wmfXX branches. If there is, it is a commit called something like Commit of various WMF live hacks. That one commit can be safely reverted. eg: https://git.wikimedia.org/commit/mediawiki%2Fcore.git/a868d086b68f05e7f93727dfb992c3f59c0525cf Nope, I mean different hacks (that people generally don't bother ops/deployers with), like the ones being removed by https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/61075/ or https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/72151/ or https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/102492/ or https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/82102/ . They are required because (to simplify) generated page HTML (which is cached for up to 30 days on our cluster) includes links to autoupdating JS and CSS code. Thus any JS/CSS changes need to be compatible with older generated HTML. I've thought for awhile that there are better ways to deal with the cache than this. My thought was a sort of snapshot feature for ResourceLoader: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Dantman/Code_Ideas#rl-snapshot - We start outputting version= on the load.php requests for skin resources. - WMF runs a script that dumps the current state of just about all modules into a snapshot folder. - The MediaWiki upgrade is performed. - Some configuration makes reference to the location of the snapshot. - When load.php sees an old version= it serves resources from the snapshot instead of MediaWiki, this way even if the styles, scripts, etc... have been modified, the module has been renamed, or even entirely deleted the module is still served to old pages. This way we don't have to create or revert any hacks at all, we are unrestricted in the types of CSS/JS and HTML changes we make, and WMF doesn't get any special treatment since now any wiki large enough to have issues resetting its entire cache can take advantage of it. ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/] ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drop support for PHP 5.3
Is that the rule then, we have to make MediaWiki work on anything Ubuntu still supports? Is there a rule? - Trevor On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Markus Krötzsch mar...@semantic-mediawiki.org wrote: On 20/02/14 05:17, Jamie Thingelstad wrote: Regarding PHP 5.3 support, I put together a quick report in WikiApiary showing the versions of PHP in use across wikis. https://wikiapiary.com/wiki/PHP_Versions In short, 5.3 is the most common PHP version used by a large, large majority. Three things to footnote in this data (and you could run additional queries to get the real data for these). 1. WMF itself runs PHP 5.3, so that explodes the user count a lot. If you excluded WMF (based on an assumption that WMF controls it so thus could move to newer version easily) it lowers the active users on 5.3 dramatically. 2. A large percentage of the 5.3 install base is there because that is what Ubuntu is distributing (my farm is on 5.3 for this reason). If there was an easy PPA solution to move from 5.3 to 5.4 for Ubuntu 12.04 that would also lessen the dependency on 5.3. FWIW, the next long-term support (LTS) version of Ubuntu is due on 17 April this year. It ships with PHP 5.5. This would be the Ubuntu version that hosters would want to upgrade to. However, the previous LTS version will still be supported until April 2017, so there is no urge for people to upgrade. Cheers, Markus 3. If you queried by Netblock you could identify how many of these 5.3 users are on Bluehost, Dreamhost or other system where they have no ability to upgrade, the hosted would have to do that. All data (except time series edit data) for WikiApiary is stored as semantic properties, so all of these things are available for #ask queries. ___ 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] Drop support for PHP 5.3
Maybe not a firm rule, but something worth being aware of. Lots of people use LTSes, so it'd be nice to not break them without some upgrade path :) -Chad On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.orgwrote: Is that the rule then, we have to make MediaWiki work on anything Ubuntu still supports? Is there a rule? - Trevor On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 12:25 AM, Markus Krötzsch mar...@semantic-mediawiki.org wrote: On 20/02/14 05:17, Jamie Thingelstad wrote: Regarding PHP 5.3 support, I put together a quick report in WikiApiary showing the versions of PHP in use across wikis. https://wikiapiary.com/wiki/PHP_Versions In short, 5.3 is the most common PHP version used by a large, large majority. Three things to footnote in this data (and you could run additional queries to get the real data for these). 1. WMF itself runs PHP 5.3, so that explodes the user count a lot. If you excluded WMF (based on an assumption that WMF controls it so thus could move to newer version easily) it lowers the active users on 5.3 dramatically. 2. A large percentage of the 5.3 install base is there because that is what Ubuntu is distributing (my farm is on 5.3 for this reason). If there was an easy PPA solution to move from 5.3 to 5.4 for Ubuntu 12.04 that would also lessen the dependency on 5.3. FWIW, the next long-term support (LTS) version of Ubuntu is due on 17 April this year. It ships with PHP 5.5. This would be the Ubuntu version that hosters would want to upgrade to. However, the previous LTS version will still be supported until April 2017, so there is no urge for people to upgrade. Cheers, Markus 3. If you queried by Netblock you could identify how many of these 5.3 users are on Bluehost, Dreamhost or other system where they have no ability to upgrade, the hosted would have to do that. All data (except time series edit data) for WikiApiary is stored as semantic properties, so all of these things are available for #ask queries. ___ 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] Drop support for PHP 5.3
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.orgwrote: Is that the rule then, we have to make MediaWiki work on anything Ubuntu still supports? Is there a rule? We should strongly consider ensuring that the latest stable releases of Ubuntu and probably RHEL (or maybe fedora) can run MediaWiki. - Ryan ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
One asks whether the Foundation would've asked for a .wikimedia tld when ICANN had that application period open (provided we actually could've afforded funds to pay the huge fees required). On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:05 PM, Marc A. Pelletier m...@uberbox.org wrote: On 02/20/2014 04:51 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: TLD proliferation is a scam by money-hungry registrars who want people to register (and thus pay) in multiple TLDs to protect their brands. Well, the ostensible pretext is that .com. is now ridiculously overloaded with myovercomplicateddomain.com because all the meaningful short names are taken, and this is supposed to allow you to register in the right TLD only. Of course, that's not going to happen in practice as every TLD will be populated by all the people with .com domains for that reason. *sigh* Back in the days when I had hack.com, I refused to pay money for it to Internic when they started to charge money (thanks, PG!) as a sign of protest. Fat lot of good that did me -- or the dns. -- Marc ___ 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] Drop support for PHP 5.3
On 20 February 2014 15:34, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org wrote: Is that the rule then, we have to make MediaWiki work on anything Ubuntu still supports? Is there a rule? We should strongly consider ensuring that the latest stable releases of Ubuntu and probably RHEL (or maybe fedora) can run MediaWiki. Is that a no, only the latest stable releases, or yes, the latest stable releases and also the LTS releases? J. -- James D. Forrester Product Manager, VisualEditor Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. jforres...@wikimedia.org | @jdforrester ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drop support for PHP 5.3
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:58 PM, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.orgwrote: On 20 February 2014 15:34, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org wrote: Is that the rule then, we have to make MediaWiki work on anything Ubuntu still supports? Is there a rule? We should strongly consider ensuring that the latest stable releases of Ubuntu and probably RHEL (or maybe fedora) can run MediaWiki. Is that a no, only the latest stable releases, or yes, the latest stable releases and also the LTS releases? If it isn't an LTS it isn't a stable release. - Ryan ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
Le 20/02/2014 22:51, Brion Vibber a écrit : TLD proliferation is a scam by money-hungry registrars who want people to register (and thus pay) in multiple TLDs to protect their brands. I recommend we boycott/ignore these various things and just avoid them, but I know we're going to end up registering a bunch for the brand protection (racket). To the lawyers around there: Can a trademark owner sue the registrar directly? After all it sold a product (the domain) using your trademark. (and yeah agree WMF should not get every possible domains floating around) -- Antoine hashar Musso ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Antoine Musso hashar+...@free.fr wrote: Le 20/02/2014 22:51, Brion Vibber a écrit : TLD proliferation is a scam by money-hungry registrars who want people to register (and thus pay) in multiple TLDs to protect their brands. I recommend we boycott/ignore these various things and just avoid them, but I know we're going to end up registering a bunch for the brand protection (racket). To the lawyers around there: Can a trademark owner sue the registrar directly? After all it sold a product (the domain) using your trademark. Remember that wiki is not a WMF trademark :) But presumably if someone registered something like pedia.wiki we'd have a variety of tools to have to address the problem. Luis -- Luis Villa Deputy General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6810 NOTICE: *This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity.* ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drop support for PHP 5.3
Let me put this out there so there isn’t confusion. The regular 6 month releases of Ubuntu are the stable releases. A LTS release is released every two years on the same cycle as regular Ubuntu releases. A LTS release is certainly more stable than regular releases, but not calling regular releases stable is a bit misleading. Techman224 On Feb 20, 2014, at 6:02 PM, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:58 PM, James Forrester jforres...@wikimedia.orgwrote: On 20 February 2014 15:34, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:22 PM, Trevor Parscal tpars...@wikimedia.org wrote: Is that the rule then, we have to make MediaWiki work on anything Ubuntu still supports? Is there a rule? We should strongly consider ensuring that the latest stable releases of Ubuntu and probably RHEL (or maybe fedora) can run MediaWiki. Is that a no, only the latest stable releases, or yes, the latest stable releases and also the LTS releases? If it isn't an LTS it isn't a stable release. - Ryan ___ 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] Drop support for PHP 5.3
On 21 February 2014 01:00, Techman224 techman...@techman224.ca wrote: Let me put this out there so there isn’t confusion. The regular 6 month releases of Ubuntu are the stable releases. A LTS release is released every two years on the same cycle as regular Ubuntu releases. A LTS release is certainly more stable than regular releases, but not calling regular releases stable is a bit misleading. For server purposes, I think we can stick to LTSes. Approximately nobody runs a non-LTS Ubuntu for their web hosting. (And even less now that non-LTSes are only getting a nine-month lifetime.) - d. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] deploying the most recent MediaWiki code: which branch?
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Ryan Lane rlan...@gmail.com wrote: Note that unless you're willing to keep up to date with WMF's relatively fast pace of branching, you're going to miss security updates. No matter what, if you use git you're going to get security updates slower, since they are released into the tarballs first, then merged into master, then branches (is this accurate?). Sometimes the current WMF branch won't even get the security updates since they are already merged locally onto Wikimedia's deployment server. I've been releasing tarballs, then pushing the fixes into the release branches and master in gerrit. It all happens within a couple of hours, but the tarballs have a slightly narrower timeframe. I rarely push to wmfXX branches, since those already have the patches applied on the cluster, and the next branch cut from master will contain the fix from master. We're potentially moving to pushing them into gerrit and having jenkins build the tarballs, so this process might be flipped in the near future. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
[Wikitech-l] Minor Bingle improvements - users please update your code
I had some free time today and made some minor improvements to Bingle to take care of two longstanding, really annoying issues: https://github.com/awjrichards/bingle/issues/10 https://github.com/awjrichards/bingle/issues/11 (Same issues also reported via BZ: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57830) The changes should improve the formatting of bug descriptions/comments in Mingle. Bingle users, please consider git pull'ing for the latest :) -- Arthur Richards Software Engineer, Mobile [[User:Awjrichards]] IRC: awjr +1-415-839-6885 x6687 ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drop support for PHP 5.3
Hey, I would like to present Jamie with the official barn-kitten of useful data brought to a wikitech thread. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bg9lHl8CMAAhXz-.jpg Congratulations Jamie! I'd also like to take this opportunity to start an RFC on redesigning all of MediaWiki's UI, with me doing the work. Clearly my Gimp skills can bring us to the next level. Cheers -- Jeroen De Dauw http://www.bn2vs.com Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3 -- ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drop support for PHP 5.3
Being a firm believer in the LTS model, I support David's take on this issue. Besides, they tend to be tested and reliable and have a longer support window by default, so it makes sense to support them in turn. From: dger...@gmail.com Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 01:04:39 + To: wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Drop support for PHP 5.3 On 21 February 2014 01:00, Techman224 techman...@techman224.ca wrote: Let me put this out there so there isn’t confusion. The regular 6 month releases of Ubuntu are the stable releases. A LTS release is released every two years on the same cycle as regular Ubuntu releases. A LTS release is certainly more stable than regular releases, but not calling regular releases stable is a bit misleading. For server purposes, I think we can stick to LTSes. Approximately nobody runs a non-LTS Ubuntu for their web hosting. (And even less now that non-LTSes are only getting a nine-month lifetime.) - 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] .wiki gTLD
On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Luis Villa lvi...@wikimedia.org wrote: On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Antoine Musso hashar+...@free.fr wrote: Le 20/02/2014 22:51, Brion Vibber a écrit : TLD proliferation is a scam by money-hungry registrars who want people to register (and thus pay) in multiple TLDs to protect their brands. I recommend we boycott/ignore these various things and just avoid them, but I know we're going to end up registering a bunch for the brand protection (racket). To the lawyers around there: Can a trademark owner sue the registrar directly? After all it sold a product (the domain) using your trademark. Remember that wiki is not a WMF trademark :) But presumably if someone registered something like pedia.wiki we'd have a variety of tools to have to address the problem. Or we could do like Brion suggests and completely ignore that .wiki and these other new gTLDs exist. -Chad ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Drop support for PHP 5.3
On Tue, Feb 18, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Faidon Liambotis fai...@wikimedia.orgwrote: Last time we were discussing PHP 5.4 it was quite a while ago but I remember hearing that we'd need to do some porting work for our extensions. Plus, we we re having a debate we were having about Suhosin that I don't think ended up anywhere :) On that front, I think everyone who was holding out for Suhosin had conceded that it wasn't going to happen, so that's not a blocker. However, last I heard, platform engineering is focusing on HHVM now instead, so I'm not sure if it actually makes sense to spend resources to move to PHP 5.4 right now. Agreed. We've started work in earnest, with the goal of getting one service deployed in HipHop soon: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/HipHop_deployment After we get that service deployed, we may need to set aside that work for other priorities. We'll be assessing at our next quarterly review in April, deciding if we want to finish off the job quickly, or if we need to let it rest while more bugs are knocked out of the system. If it looks like it's going to take a while, we can also decide if we want a PHP 5.4 upgrade prior to a full cutover to HipHop. Rob ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] Decisions on HTML templating + Service Oriented Architecture (was Re: RFC review this Friday: HTML templating + Service Oriented Architecture)
Gabriel and I have posted about the current work, prototype implementations, and proposed solution in a new wiki page: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/HTML_templating_library/KnockoutProposal We hope everyone has a chance to read it and bring their comments / questions / concerns to IRC tomorrow (9 AM PST in #wikimedia-meetbot.) ~Matt Walker Wikimedia Foundation Fundraising Technology Team On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Gabriel Wicke gwi...@wikimedia.org wrote: On 02/20/2014 01:55 PM, Rob Lanphier wrote: On Wed, Feb 19, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Sumana Harihareswara suma...@wikimedia.org mailto:suma...@wikimedia.org wrote: This week, we're mostly discussing the HTML templating and SOA RFCs - https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_Summit_2014/HTML_templating and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Services_and_narrow_interfaces have more information. Gabriel Wicke will be asking for some decisions on both. :) Hi Gabriel, Could you spell out on the mailing list what decisions you are hoping we make on these two (or if this overstated your expectations for tomorrow)? It certainly overstates my expectations a bit. As mentioned yesterday, I could imagine discussing packaging and distribution. It would be great if Faidon was present, and I asked him if he has time. He was busy though, so I don't know definitely if he'll be there. (This is the bit that Sumana billed as SOA.) HTML templating is now fairly far along, and I'd like to get feedback on the next steps. Matt me will post to the list about that today. Gabriel ___ 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] Decisions on HTML templating + Service Oriented Architecture (was Re: RFC review this Friday: HTML templating + Service Oriented Architecture)
Thanks Matt! I've been looking forward to more public communication on this work! (Per https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_meetings/RFC_review_2014-02-21the meeting is in #wikimedia-office and not #wikimedia-meetbot .) Sumana Harihareswara Engineering Community Manager Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] .wiki gTLD
Le 21/02/2014 01:25, Luis Villa a écrit : Can a trademark owner sue the registrar directly? After all it sold a product (the domain) using your trademark. Remember that wiki is not a WMF trademark :) But presumably if someone registered something like pedia.wiki we'd have a variety of tools to have to address the problem. Sure! I was merely referring to people protecting their brands by buying domain in all TLDs. If I own the trademark coca-cola I would assume the registrar would not be able use (ie: sell a domain) without a license from me. -- Antoine hashar Musso ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Re: [Wikitech-l] February '14 appreciation thread
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 1:15 AM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.net wrote: Hi! In a shameless copy of Sumana's August 2012 idea, I'd like to send public thanks to some people who have helped me get some things done in the past few weeks/days: I am new here, and I am already in love with this community. Thanks to you for posting this mail and then thanks to David Cucena, Quim Gil, Brain Wolff, Eugene Zelenko for welcoming me to the community and helping me with questions on 3D geometry viewer. -- Inderpreet Singh Ekoankar Sahai ishwerdas.com facebook.com/okayinder https://kippt.com/okayinder ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
