[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added, and revision status changed
User ^demon changed the status of MediaWiki.r85296. Old Status: fixme New Status: resolved User ^demon also posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c18877 Commit summary: Add a getSkin that returns a dummy linker for BC with extensions still abusing it to access the linker. Comment: I agree, and I've fixed REL1_18 in r90987. ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added
User Tbleher posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c16041 Commit summary: Add a getSkin that returns a dummy linker for BC with extensions still abusing it to access the linker. Comment: Sorry, I think my messages were worded poorly. To clarify: the main fixme issue I see here is that the function added doesn't do what it says, because it doesn't actually return a Skin object. Either the function should be changed to return a Skin object, or it should be removed. The second option would at least generate a clear error message for any code calling this function (I had to stare at the SMW code for a while until I understood that it broke because getSkin() did no longer return a Skin object) I should also add that I appreciate Dantmans work to make the code clearer and refactor it. ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added
User Happy-melon posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c16043 Commit summary: Add a getSkin that returns a dummy linker for BC with extensions still abusing it to access the linker. Comment: You can't rename it, that makes no sense at all. It's the existence of the function ParserOptions::getSkin() which is needed for B/C. Equally it can't return a Skin object because Skin no longer has all of the functions which legacy code might call, making it useless for B/C. ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added, and revision status changed
User Tbleher changed the status of MediaWiki.r85296. Old Status: new New Status: fixme User Tbleher also posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c15720 Comment: Surely getSkin() should return a skin object rather than a Linker object? I use an old version of SMW on my wiki[1] that does $parser-getOptions()-getSkin()-makeSpecialUrl() This is broken now. [1]: I know I should upgrade, but my version contains some custom code that will have to be forward ported. ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added
User Dantman posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c15722 Comment: Why do we have to support old versions of extensions in new versions of core? ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added
User Siebrand posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c15726 Comment: This is not a reason for marking an issue as FIXME. If the change broke the trunk version of an extension, it might be. Leaving this at FIXME because of #c15686. ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added
User Nikerabbit posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c15686 Comment: You sure didn't give a lot of time to fix this... ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added
User Siebrand posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c15687 Comment: Isn't it good practice to support this without warnings for at least one release (1.18), have it whine the next release (1.19), and remove it in the 3rd (1.20)? ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added
User Happy-melon posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c15675 Comment: This probably supercedes r85257? ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85296]: New comment added
User Dantman posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85296. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85296#c15676 Comment: No... that's the right way to do it.. ;) I just inadvertently forced you to fix it now instead of letting the wfDeprecated calls prod you. ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-codereview
