[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-07-14 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

--- Comment #32 from Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com ---
Marking as fixed, the issues in comment 0 were fixed, and it supports
autogenerated documentation.

What's still missing is the on-wiki documentation, that's bug 58361.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-04-02 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|REOPENED|ASSIGNED

--- Comment #31 from Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to Brad Jorsch from comment #0)

 For list=flow:
 * The link returned by getHelpUrls() does not actually document this API
 module.

I had removed this earlier, but I'll make sure to add it in once the parameters
are finalized.

 * The flowaction parameter does not list available actions.

Removed in I73347cb3b0a8cf35881691f50e70be10d10571b8 because it's pointless.

 * Same criticisms of the params blob as above.

After looking through all the JS that call this, they're either options to
control the result format, like contentFormat: wikitext, or they're a
post-id. I'll turn this into 2-3 more parameters to the API module directly.

 * You are setting _element directly instead of using ApiResult's methods.

Note to self that this needs to be fixed in all implementations of
Block::renderAPI as well.

 * You should be checking the return from ApiResult's addValue method and
 properly handling failure.

From the documentation, addValue will return false if the data is too big.
We'll need some kind of continuation parameter...I'm not exactly sure how Flow
handles that internally.

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/q/project:mediawiki/extensions/Flow+topic:flow-api,n,z

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-03-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #29 from Gerrit Notification Bot gerritad...@wikimedia.org ---
Change 107411 merged by jenkins-bot:
API: Revamp action=flow

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/107411

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-03-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Matthias Mullie mmul...@wikimedia.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
 CC||mmul...@wikimedia.org
 Resolution|--- |FIXED

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-03-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Brad Jorsch bjor...@wikimedia.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|REOPENED
 Resolution|FIXED   |---

--- Comment #30 from Brad Jorsch bjor...@wikimedia.org ---
action=flow looks much better!

list=flow still needs work though, so reopening.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-02-21 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|PATCH_TO_REVIEW |ASSIGNED
 CC||ro...@wikimedia.org

--- Comment #28 from Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org ---
This bug is marked as PATCH_TO_REVIEW, but the patch in question is marked as
work in progress ([WIP]).  For clarity, I'm moving this back out to
assigned, since I understand that Kunal is working on it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-02-03 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #25 from Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #24)
 (In reply to comment #23)
  Easily. Just include the necessary text in the string returned from the
  module's getDescription() method.
 
 Sorry, more meant Can the team please do this soon, or say why not? :)

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/110967/ should address that.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-02-03 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Alex Z. mrzmanw...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mrzmanw...@gmail.com

--- Comment #26 from Alex Z. mrzmanw...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #21)
 So, to expand: I fully believe that the community should be factored into the
 decision-making process, directly and indirectly - but factored in is very
 different from being a trump card. If the argument is there will be people
 who
 look at the API and think it's Us Doing The VisualEditor All Over Again,

I'm looking at this and thinking, Oh, no, it's them doing WikiEditor all over
again, where a product is deployed to wikis before the API is properly
documented or becomes stable, and bot/script developers practically have to
reverse engineer it in order to update all of their code in time.

I mean, you're at the point of field testing it in production, but there
apparently isn't even a specification for how the real API will work, let alone
a place where the people who will be using it might actually be able to make
some input.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-02-03 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #27 from sp...@wikimedia.org ---
 (In reply to comment #21)
Alex Z., what do you and others want from a Flow API?  How can we best
collaborate on it?  A Flow board makes API requests for all in-page updates, so
Flow heavily exercises its API while we implement Brad Jorsch's feedback, but
I'm concerned about what we overlook. I filed bug 60808 and bug 60809, but I'm
just guessing.

Erik Bernhardson posted
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bot_owners%27_noticeboard#New_extension:_Flow
, so that's another venue. I mentioned these bugs there.

I've created https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Flow/Architecture/API with links to
these, and empty sections awaiting use cases. I'll try to keep it updated.

Thanks everyone.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-31 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #18 from Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org ---
(Off-topic, like the rest of the last 6 or so comments, but, I wanted to
publicly say: Sorry for my tone. We'll work together on addressing this bug.)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-31 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #19 from Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.net ---
(In reply to comment #9)

 Possibly. There are some community members who would find a way to take
 offence to how is your day going?. I don't particularly think we should base
 our decisions around pandering to them.

This is unacceptable attitude, Oliver. You in particular should know better
than that.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-31 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #20 from Nemo federicol...@tiscali.it ---
(In reply to comment #13)
 Personally I find impersonal communication methods like bugzilla a passive
 aggressive way to air issues without actually talking to anyone directly.

I'm severely confused. After reading comment 0 out of the blue, I expected
comment 1 to start like this: Great Brad, thanks for your thorough review of
our API module! It's very useful when someone helps us learn more about/do
better with some specialised areas of the code rather than let us alone hitting
against a wall. And then a conversation to clarify the various actionable
items and to log them properly in atomic bugs or cards.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-31 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #21 from Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #19)
 (In reply to comment #9)
 
  Possibly. There are some community members who would find a way to take
  offence to how is your day going?. I don't particularly think we should 
  base
  our decisions around pandering to them.
 
 This is unacceptable attitude, Oliver. You in particular should know better
 than that.

Sorry, I should be clearer; the 'them' is 'the sort of people who would find a
way to take offence...'

So, to expand: I fully believe that the community should be factored into the
decision-making process, directly and indirectly - but factored in is very
different from being a trump card. If the argument is there will be people who
look at the API and think it's Us Doing The VisualEditor All Over Again,
that's a bad argument, and the sort of people who would jump from 'the minimum
viable product is not perfect' to 'everything is going to be terrible forever'
are not people I am particularly interested in basing our decisions on, because
anyone who _makes_ that cognitive leap is clearly not approaching things
rationally, and so it becomes very hard to actually compromise with them - if
compromising with them is actually worthwhile in the first place.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-31 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #22 from Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org ---
So, back on topic...

From Brian on bug 60178 comment 28:
I would think the appropriate thing to do (If we must do this) is to include a
note in the auto-generated api documentation.

Can this be done, or explain why not? I still think a note to BAG or similar is
good in addition, personally.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-31 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #23 from Brad Jorsch bjor...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #22)
 So, back on topic...
 
 From Brian on bug 60178 comment 28:
 I would think the appropriate thing to do (If we must do this) is to
 include a
 note in the auto-generated api documentation.
 
 Can this be done

Easily. Just include the necessary text in the string returned from the
module's getDescription() method.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-31 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #24 from Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #23)
 Easily. Just include the necessary text in the string returned from the
 module's getDescription() method.

Sorry, more meant Can the team please do this soon, or say why not? :)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #13 from Erik Bernhardson ebernhard...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #12)
 (In reply to comment #10)
  (In reply to comment #7)
   In the future, let's not rely on passive Bugzilla communication
   around things you feel are serious blockers; let's just talk to each other
   directly
  
  In that case please document outcome as a comment in Bugzilla, so community
  members can also be aware and provide input if they were not physically
  around
  in your office.
 
 Personally, I find bugzilla works as well as email and IRC doesn't seem like
 it
 would have been that much of an improvement here.
 
 No one besides me is around my office. ;)

Personally I find impersonal communication methods like bugzilla a passive
aggressive way to air issues without actually talking to anyone directly.  If
you had come into our irc room months ago and xommunicated in real time I
guarantee this bug would be in a different state.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Chad H. innocentkil...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||innocentkil...@gmail.com

--- Comment #14 from Chad H. innocentkil...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #13)
 (In reply to comment #12)
  (In reply to comment #10)
   (In reply to comment #7)
In the future, let's not rely on passive Bugzilla communication
around things you feel are serious blockers; let's just talk to each 
other
directly
   
   In that case please document outcome as a comment in Bugzilla, so 
   community
   members can also be aware and provide input if they were not physically
   around
   in your office.
  
  Personally, I find bugzilla works as well as email and IRC doesn't seem like
  it
  would have been that much of an improvement here.
  
  No one besides me is around my office. ;)
 
 Personally I find impersonal communication methods like bugzilla a passive
 aggressive way to air issues without actually talking to anyone directly.  If
 you had come into our irc room months ago and xommunicated in real time I
 guarantee this bug would be in a different state.

Bugzilla is how one files bugs against a product--sorry you don't like it. The
nice thing is it's asynchronous so if someone is in a different timezone they
can easily report issues without waiting for you to be around :)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #15 from Erik Bernhardson ebernhard...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #14)
 Bugzilla is how one files bugs against a product--sorry you don't like it.
 The
 nice thing is it's asynchronous so if someone is in a different timezone they
 can easily report issues without waiting for you to be around :)

Bugzilla is an excellent way to track bugs, but for solving problems nothing
beats communicating with a human being in real time.  The foundation uses real
time communication within teams extensively to organize and ensure the work
they want to get done happens.  Embrace the most effective forms of
communication you can.

Lucky for those in other timezones, we have team members in 2 american
timezones, europe and australia.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #16 from Chad H. innocentkil...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #15)
 (In reply to comment #14)
  Bugzilla is how one files bugs against a product--sorry you don't like it.
  The
  nice thing is it's asynchronous so if someone is in a different timezone 
  they
  can easily report issues without waiting for you to be around :)
 
 Bugzilla is an excellent way to track bugs, but for solving problems nothing
 beats communicating with a human being in real time.

Indeed. But it's also good to file bugs because people are imperfect and can
forget conversations they have :)

 The foundation uses
 real
 time communication within teams extensively to organize and ensure the work
 they want to get done happens.  Embrace the most effective forms of
 communication you can.
 

I know how the Foundation works...I work here too ;-)

Is real time communication awesome? Sure. Is finding someone on IRC to chat
about your problem sometimes faster than a bug? Absolutely.

But you said:

(In reply to comment #13)
 Personally I find impersonal communication methods like bugzilla a passive
 aggressive way to air issues without actually talking to anyone directly.  If
 you had come into our irc room months ago and xommunicated in real time I
 guarantee this bug would be in a different state.

Regardless of your personal opinions about Bugzilla, it's where we file bugs
about
our software--all of it. It's completely reasonable to expect people to file
bugs here, and they should be treated with just as much interest and care as
things tracked in Mingle, Trello, or reported to the IRC ether.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-28 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #17 from Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #15)
 (In reply to comment #14)
  Bugzilla is how one files bugs against a product--sorry you don't like it.
  The
  nice thing is it's asynchronous so if someone is in a different timezone 
  they
  can easily report issues without waiting for you to be around :)
 
 Bugzilla is an excellent way to track bugs, but for solving problems nothing
 beats communicating with a human being in real time.  The foundation uses
 real
 time communication within teams extensively to organize and ensure the work
 they want to get done happens.  Embrace the most effective forms of
 communication you can.
 
 Lucky for those in other timezones, we have team members in 2 american
 timezones, europe and australia.

The point is simply: there was a bug report by a respected member of the
platform team (whether or not you knew he was the point person for the API);
please respond to bug reports. People are busy and reviewing a lot of people's
code and can't be on point to track everyone down all the time (seriously, if
Platform had to do that, we'd never get anything else done).

Please take some initiative and review your bugzilla tickets and ask for
clarification where needed.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-27 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Maryana Pinchuk mpinc...@wikimedia.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||mpinc...@wikimedia.org

--- Comment #7 from Maryana Pinchuk mpinc...@wikimedia.org ---
Brad,

We've chosen our first deployment to English Wikipedia with care. The reason
Flow is only going live on the 2 discussion pages in question
(Wikipedia_talk:Wikiproject_Breakfast and Wikipedia_talk:Wikiproject_Hampshire)
is that those pages have zero bot activity, and relatively light human traffic,
for that matter, skewing largely power user (e.g. no clueless n00bs who need to
get smacked around by Cluebot). In my capacity as product owner, I felt
completely comfortable deploying a beta trial of experimental software with an
incomplete API to two pages where an API wouldn't be critically necessary for
vital workflows, with the understanding that the next step after this
deployment would be to reach out to bot operators, invite them to test
aggressively on a developer test page, and work with them to make the API
fulfill their needs. I apologize for not communicating all of this to you
explicitly sooner; frankly, it was hard for me to ascertain whether this
particular bug was more or less high-priority than your critiques of our use of
whitespace. In the future, let's not rely on passive Bugzilla communication
around things you feel are serious blockers; let's just talk to each other
directly -- I don't bite :)

I understand that your priorities as a platform engineer fall toward making
sure our API is robust and well-documented. But please keep in mind that this
project also involves significant design and UI components that are just as
critical to the success of the overall mission (to replace talk pages entirely
and create more universally-usable, stable software tools for all the processes
they support). Putting Flow out there on a couple of real discussion spaces is
the only way we're going to be able to get actionable feedback on the design
and UI side. The sooner we start receiving this kind of feedback, the sooner we
can prioritize our work on all the outstanding bugs, enhancements and feature
requests, so we get the right features to the right users at the right time.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-27 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #8 from Brad Jorsch bjor...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #7)
 Putting Flow out there on a couple of real discussion spaces
 is
 the only way we're going to be able to get actionable feedback on the design
 and UI side. The sooner we start receiving this kind of feedback, the sooner
 we
 can prioritize our work on all the outstanding bugs, enhancements and feature
 requests, so we get the right features to the right users at the right time.

That sounds like the same reasoning they used when deploying VE to enwiki with
known bugs unfixed. I think we all know how well *that* went.

I realize the proposed deployment of Flow to enwiki is somewhat different since
it's a deployment to two rather out-of-the-way talk pages rather than being
enabled by default for everyone. But on the other hand, it's also that much
less likely to give you the sort of feedback you're hoping for. And certain
vocal community members will be on the defensive given the recent VE situation,
ready to blast the WMF for doing the same thing again.


(In reply to comment #7)
 I understand that your priorities as a platform engineer fall toward making
 sure our API is robust and well-documented.

I also want to avoid causing our volunteer community members to develop towards
an API with known major flaws by pushing it on a production site before it's
ready. The test wikis and mediawiki.org, while in production, are still test
sites.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-27 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #9 from Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #8)
 (In reply to comment #7)
  Putting Flow out there on a couple of real discussion spaces
  is
  the only way we're going to be able to get actionable feedback on the design
  and UI side. The sooner we start receiving this kind of feedback, the sooner
  we
  can prioritize our work on all the outstanding bugs, enhancements and 
  feature
  requests, so we get the right features to the right users at the right time.
 
 That sounds like the same reasoning they used when deploying VE to enwiki
 with
 known bugs unfixed. I think we all know how well *that* went.
 
 I realize the proposed deployment of Flow to enwiki is somewhat different
 since
 it's a deployment to two rather out-of-the-way talk pages rather than being
 enabled by default for everyone. But on the other hand, it's also that much
 less likely to give you the sort of feedback you're hoping for. And certain
 vocal community members will be on the defensive given the recent VE
 situation,
 ready to blast the WMF for doing the same thing again.
 
Possibly. There are some community members who would find a way to take offence
to how is your day going?. I don't particularly think we should base our
decisions around pandering to them.
 
 (In reply to comment #7)
  I understand that your priorities as a platform engineer fall toward making
  sure our API is robust and well-documented.
 
 I also want to avoid causing our volunteer community members to develop
 towards
 an API with known major flaws by pushing it on a production site before it's
 ready. The test wikis and mediawiki.org, while in production, are still test
 sites.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-27 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #10 from Andre Klapper aklap...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #7)
 In the future, let's not rely on passive Bugzilla communication
 around things you feel are serious blockers; let's just talk to each other
 directly

In that case please document outcome as a comment in Bugzilla, so community
members can also be aware and provide input if they were not physically around
in your office.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-27 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #11 from Oliver Keyes oke...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #10)
 (In reply to comment #7)
  In the future, let's not rely on passive Bugzilla communication
  around things you feel are serious blockers; let's just talk to each other
  directly
 
 In that case please document outcome as a comment in Bugzilla, so community
 members can also be aware and provide input if they were not physically
 around
 in your office.

I think that's what Maryana just said she'd do. Indeed, it's what she just did
:).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-27 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #12 from Brad Jorsch bjor...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #10)
 (In reply to comment #7)
  In the future, let's not rely on passive Bugzilla communication
  around things you feel are serious blockers; let's just talk to each other
  directly
 
 In that case please document outcome as a comment in Bugzilla, so community
 members can also be aware and provide input if they were not physically
 around
 in your office.

Personally, I find bugzilla works as well as email and IRC doesn't seem like it
would have been that much of an improvement here.

No one besides me is around my office. ;)

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-26 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

MZMcBride b...@mzmcbride.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||60178

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-26 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #5 from Greg Grossmeier g...@wikimedia.org ---
Flow team: This was reported in November with pretty clear concerns. Brad is
the current point of reason/arbitration for the API. Can you give a response to
this as well? (On BZ not Mingle ;) ).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-26 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Gerrit Notification Bot gerritad...@wikimedia.org changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|PATCH_TO_REVIEW

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2014-01-26 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #6 from Gerrit Notification Bot gerritad...@wikimedia.org ---
Change 107411 had a related patch set uploaded by Legoktm:
[WIP] Revamp API

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/107411

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2013-12-17 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #4 from Brad Jorsch bjor...@wikimedia.org ---
(In reply to comment #3)
 (In reply to comment #0)
  * The link returned by getHelpUrls() does not actually document this API
  module.
 
 Removed in https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/102030/

Good to get rid of the bad link. But list=flow does need a valid implementation
of getHelpUrls(). I expect you already are aware of this, but the obvious bears
stating.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2013-12-16 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Assignee|wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia. |legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com
   |org |

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2013-12-16 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #3 from Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com ---
(In reply to comment #0)
 * I note that ApiBase is already a ContextSource, so there is no need for
 $this-getContext()-getUser() instead of just $this-getUser().

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/102046/

 * The link returned by getHelpUrls() does not actually document this API
 module.

Removed in https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/102030/

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2013-12-11 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Blocks||58361

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2013-12-11 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Priority|Unprioritized   |High

--- Comment #2 from Kunal Mehta (Legoktm) legoktm.wikipe...@gmail.com ---
Marking as high priority, it gets much harder to change the API once something
is deployed...

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l


[Bug 57659] Flow: API module issues

2013-11-27 Thread bugzilla-daemon
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659

--- Comment #1 from Bingle bingle-ad...@wikimedia.org ---
The WMF core features team tracks this bug on Mingle card
https://mingle.corp.wikimedia.org/projects/flow/cards/532, but people from the
community are welcome to contribute here and in Gerrit.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
___
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l