On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 6:33 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Flow is a long term bet that an architecture of structured comments
will ultimately have fewer hard and fast limitations on how
collaboration in wikis can work, and will accrue usability benefits
very quickly (as it
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 3:33 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
As I wrote to Risker, I think it's worth considering spending some
development time on turning something like the Teahouse gadget (which
allows one click insertion of replies on the Teahouse Q/A page) into a
Beta Feature
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 6:47 PM, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
- Gabriel Wicke has done some experimentation with this as well, and
is looking if he can dig up the old code for me.
Very old indeed, but if anyone wants to take a look:
https://github.com/gwicke/wikiforum
--
Erik
Hello all,
I did a couple if simple tests on MediaWiki on Flow pages with often
occurring edits. The tests failed.
I am an admin on Commons, and I regularly have to remove an image on a talk
page because it is for example a violation of copyright. I see no way to
remove the copyright violation
On 06.09.2014 23:14, Romaine Wiki wrote:
Hello all,
I did a couple if simple tests on MediaWiki on Flow pages with often
occurring edits. The tests failed.
...
So, there is flow, and instead of the community can work with it as it
needs to work with, it does not flow but got stuck...
To
Hi,
I forgot to mention that we use a lot of template messages on talk pages to
inform users about something. In a part of these templates we automatically
add categories because we want to track the users who have problematic
behaviour. Testing this by adding a category to a message in Flow
On 6 September 2014 15:33, Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Flow doesn't automatically update template output -- it retains the
output as it was when the user posted the comment. We can argue
whether that's good or bad behavior, but it's worth doing so in the
context of real examples.
2014-09-07 0:33 GMT+02:00 Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org:
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 2:14 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com
wrote:
I am an admin on Commons, and I regularly have to remove an image on a
talk
page because it is for example a violation of copyright. I see no way to
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
There is one notable exception to the above, which is talk page header
templates. One expects updates to a template used as a talk page header to
update every page the template is currently transcluded on, which is not
rik, I appreciate your engaging with this *early* enough for design
decisions to be adjusted before Flow gets to major rollouts.
Romaine, if the Dutch uses of features like templates are not being taken
into account in how features are designed, I suggest contacting the
Engineering community
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 10:03 PM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote:
rik, I appreciate your engaging with this *early* enough for design
decisions to be adjusted before Flow gets to major rollouts.
Romaine, if the Dutch uses of features like templates are not being taken
into account in how
On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Keegan Peterzell kpeterz...@wikimedia.org
wrote:
..last July...
July 2013, for clarity.
--
Keegan Peterzell
Community Liaison, Product
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
Erik Möller wrote:
It's [Flow is] a system in early development, and has never been
advertised as anything else.
==
*This statement is simply not true.*
See the WMF's 2014-15 annual plan:
https://archive.org/details/WikimediaFoundation2014-15AnnualPlan
Page 20 (DIRECT QUOTE FOLLOWS):
Tim, I read that a bit differently.
Flow is an *experimental* but already feature
rich alternative...
We will aim to cover one major set of new deployments per quarter,
*carefully picking use cases*.
This looks to me like the kind of incremental rollout that is appropriate.
The idea of users
14 matches
Mail list logo