Re: [Wikimedia-l] FLOSS for operations equipment

[James Salsman]

Marc A. Pelletier wrote:

>... as far as I know, high-end networking hardware is not
> available with Libre OSes

Are the FreeBSD-based pfSense C2758 series in the Foundation's throughput tier?

https://www.pfsense.org/products/product-family.html#c2758

https://portal.pfsense.org/docs/manuals/c2758/system-specification.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PfSense

What are the current Foundation throughput bandwidth requirements?

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[James Alexander]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 6:57 PM, K. Peachey  wrote:

> On 21 March 2016 at 22:47, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
> >
> > The extra control is hypothetically nice, but in practice one-off
> services
> > that are different from the rest of the infrastructure (as a shop would
> be,
> > like the blog, OTRS, etc) tend to be *extremely* expensive and difficult
> to
> > care for, and tend to be the very weakest points of the system (including
> > privacy and security).
> >
> > Those are only limited by the choice of the foundation.
>
> If they wanted someone with OTRS/wordpress/cisco ios/SmartTeam/etc skills,
> they would hire appropriately so the operations team was equipped with the
> staff and skills needed.
>
> It's like running a shop without a retail manager, It could work, but would
> work a lot better if it was staffed with people with the appropriate
> skillsets.


Totally but it's all a balancing act even if you assume we have the
resources. To do this correctly you'd need at least one person on the tech
side who understand the platform and payments, preferably a couple who
could back them up if need be and who can support different parts/make sure
they're secure/code reviewed/updated etc + the folks on the front end (the
'shop  manager(s)' organizing the actual design/fulfillment/etc). The more
you add the more you need to be making to justify it and as someone who did
this math a fair bit when I was first setting up the shop we'd need quite a
bit more in terms of orders before we were making enough to cover something
in house and that was being relatively conservative in costing assuming we
would only have to pay for 30-40% of some people etc.

It also gets to the "trade off" question. That is obviously a discussion
that is more open and so I won't pretend to have the right answer but I
think at our current budget basically every new hire/project basically has
to have a trade off the hire that won't be backfilled or the project that
is canceled etc. I imagine we all can think of projects that we think are
more or less important but we don't necessarily think of the 'same'
projects which makes that trade off discussion difficult (but important
since we can't just continue to expand the budget forever).

James Alexander
Manager
Trust & Safety
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FLOSS for operations equipment

[Tilman Bayer]

See also:
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Resolution:Wikimedia_Foundation_Guiding_Principles#Freedom_and_open_source
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/FLOSS-Exchange

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 6:44 PM, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
> On 2016-03-21 6:15 PM, James Salsman wrote:
>>
>> Is there a list of equipment that WMF uses without viable FLOSS
>> alternatives, please?
>
>
> The switches and routers for one; as far as I know, high-end networking
> hardware is not available with Libre OSes, nor would the supplier support
> one flashed with a non-proprietary OS (as one can do with some mid-range
> gear).
>
> And there is a fuzzy line about being "all-FLOSS".  Do you use servers with
> only open source BIOS and firmware on all attached hardware?  At best, that
> severely crimps your options and I'm not sure there exists viable
> alternative for /all/ required hardware.
>
> The *important* thing is that anyone can grab Mediawiki, the dumps, and a
> Libre OS supporting LAMP and make the projects run.  Beyond that, best
> effort to always favour FLOSS when it gets the job done is a solid
> philosophical stance that is universally applied.  But, like most
> principles, it cannot be a suicide pact.  We cannot, as a movement, refuse
> to get the job done unless we reinvent every proprietary wheel - this way
> lies both madness and a tremendous waste of donors' money[1].
>
> -- Coren / Marc
>
> [1] For instance, a common thing that is surfaced is to home-spin software
> when the only FLOSS alternatives require either serious customization or
> maintenance; we *could* hypothetically hire enough engineers to maintain
> every bit of needed software - or even write the bits that don't exist - but
> that's not what we *do* (nor should it be).
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
Tilman Bayer
Senior Analyst
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Wikipedia Zero mass effect on Wikimedia projects

[Lucas Teles]

WereSpielChequers, the different varieties of Portuguese is not the problem
here. It actually hasn't been a problem for a while. :)))

James and Adele, I am sincerely happy to know that WMF is not only aware of
it but also applying and thinking about measures to solve the problem.

Maybe opening large doors to Wikipedia is not enough. Unfortunately, we are
frustrating many users that come to Wikipedia and Commons expecting a place
to share their selfies and create profiles about themselves. Even though
they are acting in good faith, it is a pain to repeatedly delete files and
tell new users that they can't create an article about themselves. The good
part of dealing with a good faith user is that all we need to do to stop
them or fix the problem somehow is informing them the right. After knowing
the right, previous mistakes won't be repeated in most cases.

We are, however, doing that several times to several users. Maybe we could
use ways of reaching more users in a row with loud speakers. I believe that
if they are told that they can't upload certain files for instance, a large
part of them won't.

What if we use sitenotice with geolocalization to Angola? What if we try
reaching them through social medias as they also have free access to it in
some cases? What if we look for local editors to share Wikipedia
knowledge, communicate with press and engage other local editors to raise
grounds for generating regular editors there? That may be a hard one but
what if we rethink ways of communication and recognize that user talk page
is far from optimal to connect with new users? Sorry if that sounds naive
but I can't come with better ideas.

When I say we should inform them, I am obviously not underestimating people
of Angola and not trying to do some kind of "catechism". It is just trying
to improve their learning curve about wiki. Blocking is a desperate and
sometimes necessary measure but not a solution. Limiting uploads is not so
different though more specific, but actually even on Commons there are many
problems on editing too and not only with uploading.

A well deserved barnstar to the one with an insightfull idea about it.

Kind regards,

Teles


Em segunda-feira, 21 de março de 2016, WereSpielChequers <
werespielchequ...@gmail.com
> escreveu:

> Is much of the problem about differing varieties of Portuguese? Last I
> heard the Portuguese language Wikipedia allowed multiple versions of
> Portuguese in a similar way to English - i.e. standardised at the article
> level not the project level; Though the editing base is much more skewed to
> Brazil than EN is to the US. Assuming Angolan Portuguese is closer to the
> Portuguese spoken in Portugal, then just as in EN you are likely to get
> some goodfaith newbies "correcting" spelling to the version they know. If
> so perhaps edit filters might work. Alternatively, would it be possible to
> do something similar to the Chinese Wikipedia and display different
> versions of Portuguese according to user preference/IP geography?
>
> WereSpielChequers
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 



-- 
Steward for Wikimedia Foundation. Administrator at Portuguese Wikipedia and
Wikimedia Commons.
Sent from mobile. Please, excuse my brevity.

+55 (71) 98290-7553
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[K. Peachey]

On 21 March 2016 at 22:47, Marc A. Pelletier  wrote:
>
> The extra control is hypothetically nice, but in practice one-off services
> that are different from the rest of the infrastructure (as a shop would be,
> like the blog, OTRS, etc) tend to be *extremely* expensive and difficult to
> care for, and tend to be the very weakest points of the system (including
> privacy and security).
>
> Those are only limited by the choice of the foundation.

If they wanted someone with OTRS/wordpress/cisco ios/SmartTeam/etc skills,
they would hire appropriately so the operations team was equipped with the
staff and skills needed.

It's like running a shop without a retail manager, It could work, but would
work a lot better if it was staffed with people with the appropriate
skillsets.
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FLOSS for operations equipment

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 2016-03-21 6:15 PM, James Salsman wrote:

Is there a list of equipment that WMF uses without viable FLOSS
alternatives, please?


The switches and routers for one; as far as I know, high-end networking 
hardware is not available with Libre OSes, nor would the supplier 
support one flashed with a non-proprietary OS (as one can do with some 
mid-range gear).


And there is a fuzzy line about being "all-FLOSS".  Do you use servers 
with only open source BIOS and firmware on all attached hardware?  At 
best, that severely crimps your options and I'm not sure there exists 
viable alternative for /all/ required hardware.


The *important* thing is that anyone can grab Mediawiki, the dumps, and 
a Libre OS supporting LAMP and make the projects run.  Beyond that, best 
effort to always favour FLOSS when it gets the job done is a solid 
philosophical stance that is universally applied.  But, like most 
principles, it cannot be a suicide pact.  We cannot, as a movement, 
refuse to get the job done unless we reinvent every proprietary wheel - 
this way lies both madness and a tremendous waste of donors' money[1].


-- Coren / Marc

[1] For instance, a common thing that is surfaced is to home-spin 
software when the only FLOSS alternatives require either serious 
customization or maintenance; we *could* hypothetically hire enough 
engineers to maintain every bit of needed software - or even write the 
bits that don't exist - but that's not what we *do* (nor should it be).



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] FLOSS for operations equipment

[Jimmy Wales]

On 3/22/16 12:15 AM, James Salsman wrote:
> Is there a list of equipment that WMF uses without viable FLOSS
> alternatives, please?

Since the context here is t-shirts, I think we can understand Coren's
remarks in a very broad context, and so of course he's right.  We might
choose to only do business with t-shirt manufacturers who use open
source software, but it is not clear that we'd find any.

I have always been a strong advocate of looking for FLOSS solutions for
as many things as we can.  This is particularly true for things that
directly impact the freedom of the website(s).  (I'd strongly oppose
running Wikipedia on a proprietary database platform, for example.)

And I like favoring vendors who are FLOSS-friendly, even if they are
t-shirt partners.  It sounds like Shopify are ok in the regard (I
haven't personally checked).

But there are many many vendors we need to work with where it will be
completely impractical to demand FLOSS purity.  The lawyers who are
suing the NSA?  Our auditors?  The venues for Wikimania?



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] FLOSS for operations equipment

[James Salsman]

Marc *Pelletier / Coren* wrote:

> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier
> is all-FLOSS. For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck
> without hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.

Is there a list of equipment that WMF uses without viable FLOSS
alternatives, please?

I can currently buy what appears to be incredibly cost effective RAID-5
network attached storage and powerful database and web servers meeting what
I believe to be current WMF requirements for throughput with FLOSS
solutions based on NetBSD, FreeBSD, Debian, or CentOS from apparently
reputable and highly-rated consumer outlets for a tiny fraction of the cost
that was necessary from wholesale vendors in 2009, when for some reason
beyond my present recollection I did the same exercise.

Sincerely,
Jim
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Case for Federation: Should Parts of WMF Be Spun Off?

[George Herbert]

> On Mar 19, 2016, at 8:23 PM, Gnangarra  wrote:
> 
> in breaking up (spinning parts off) the WMF we run the risk of creating
> silos of information, knowledge and disconnecting one speciality from
> another preventing cross pollination of ideas and innovation. It also
> breaks the collaborative core of the projects which has created what we
> enjoy and at the heart of our volunteer driven successes.

I am not uncritically for an organizational breakup.  Nor am I against one.

Part of the argument above seems self-contradictory, though - we have already 
demonstrated that diverse groups across the Foundation, chapters, volunteer 
groups, etc etc come together effectively.  The Movement is characterized in 
part by that.  That would seem to indicate that a reorganization that split 
part of it up would still be able to work and team up effectively.

Regardless of whether a split is a good idea or happens, grabbing the info on 
who does what for whom, and why, will help us make it better.

George William Herbert
Sent from my iPhone
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Lisa Gruwell]

Adding my thoughts to build upon what Seddon has already said:

The store is not the most mission critical work that we do, but it is
working well. It is good to have people wearing Wikipedia t-shirts out
there and to meet the need of the people who want to purchase Wikimedia
merch.   It is also a very nice thing to be able to thank an editor
 with a Wikipedia
coffee mug from time to time. The store is a lean operation and is self
sufficient.  And the profits from the store fund the give away program, so
the more we sell the more we give away.

The team who works on this has done a very good job of keeping the costs
low, producing products people want, and executing the operational side
(they get people the products they ordered on time).  We don't have large
quantities of merch ringing up high warehouse costs.  The merch is stored
in Springfield, Missouri (not San Francisco) where the rent is low.
Between sales and the giveaway program, the inventory moves pretty quickly.

If we had to build out our own sales platform in order to do this, it
probably would not be worth it.  As it is, the shop is meeting a expressed
need, turning a profit, and allowing us to give merch away.  I think the
team has done a very good job with the shop this year.

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 2:01 PM, Vi to  wrote:

> Above all hosting a shop means:
> *production on demand: no "risks" but products become more expensive and
> slow to deliver
> *warehousing: means immobilizing a certain amount of money at the risk to
> accumulate unsold items.
> IMHO an internal shop would be justified by turnover at least 10 times
> greater than Joseph's estimate in following email.
>
> Vito
>
> 2016-03-21 20:43 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen :
>
> > Hoi,
> > Have you considered the cost? It is not free to run a shop. When another
> > organisation can do it for you for less, it would be not good to have an
> > own shop on principles only.
> > Thanks,
> >   GerardM
> >
> > On 21 March 2016 at 20:39, Steinsplitter Wiki <
> steinsplitter-w...@live.com
> > >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Why do we need such a Shop?
> > >
> > > (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine,
> the
> > > shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
> > >
> > > I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia
> > > servers.
> > >
> > > --Steinsplitter
> > >
> > > > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> > > > From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> > > >
> > > > How many orders are handled by this shop?
> > > >
> > > > Rupert
> > > > On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon" 
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> > > wikimedia
> > > > > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've
> > > raised.
> > > > > But moving in-house would require resources for building and
> > > maintaining an
> > > > > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify.
> > The
> > > > > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of
> > people
> > > > > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in
> the
> > > > > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> > > > >
> > > > > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it
> well,
> > > > > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc.
> etc.
> > > and
> > > > > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time
> and
> > > money.
> > > > > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third
> party
> > > > > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we
> need
> > > to
> > > > > keep it as efficient as possible.
> > > > >
> > > > > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> > > frameworks
> > > > > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github
> > > [1] and
> > > > > I would encourage you to take a look.
> > > > >
> > > > > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10
> website
> > > > > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious
> and
> > I
> > > > > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> > > hosted
> > > > > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards
> > > > >
> > > > > Seddon
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is
> > > acceptable for
> > > > > a
> > > > > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that
> > > does
> > > > > >> contribute to FLO

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Vi to]

Above all hosting a shop means:
*production on demand: no "risks" but products become more expensive and
slow to deliver
*warehousing: means immobilizing a certain amount of money at the risk to
accumulate unsold items.
IMHO an internal shop would be justified by turnover at least 10 times
greater than Joseph's estimate in following email.

Vito

2016-03-21 20:43 GMT+01:00 Gerard Meijssen :

> Hoi,
> Have you considered the cost? It is not free to run a shop. When another
> organisation can do it for you for less, it would be not good to have an
> own shop on principles only.
> Thanks,
>   GerardM
>
> On 21 March 2016 at 20:39, Steinsplitter Wiki  >
> wrote:
>
> > Why do we need such a Shop?
> >
> > (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the
> > shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
> >
> > I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia
> > servers.
> >
> > --Steinsplitter
> >
> > > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> > > From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> > >
> > > How many orders are handled by this shop?
> > >
> > > Rupert
> > > On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:
> > >
> > > > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> > wikimedia
> > > > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've
> > raised.
> > > > But moving in-house would require resources for building and
> > maintaining an
> > > > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify.
> The
> > > > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of
> people
> > > > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > > > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> > > >
> > > > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > > > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc.
> > and
> > > > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and
> > money.
> > > > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > > > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need
> > to
> > > > keep it as efficient as possible.
> > > >
> > > > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> > frameworks
> > > > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github
> > [1] and
> > > > I would encourage you to take a look.
> > > >
> > > > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > > > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and
> I
> > > > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> > hosted
> > > > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> > > >
> > > > Regards
> > > >
> > > > Seddon
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is
> > acceptable for
> > > > a
> > > > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that
> > does
> > > > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds,
> > that
> > > > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external
> > supplier is
> > > > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck
> without
> > > > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > > > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone
> > good or
> > > > even
> > > > >> adequate ones.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is
> run
> > on
> > > > the
> > > > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually
> required
> > to
> > > > > browse and purchase?
> > > >
> > > > I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> > > > Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> > > > However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> > > > JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use
> tomorrow,
> > > > as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
> > > >
> > > > > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control
> too!
> > > >
> > > > IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> > > > domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
> > > >
> > > > Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> > > > free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> > > > of use and privacy policy.
> > > >
> > > > If we need to run non-free se

Re: [Wikimedia-l] The Case for Federation: Should Parts of WMF Be Spun Off?

[Mark A. Hershberger]

Erik Moeller writes:

> == Potential test case: MediaWiki Foundation ==
>
> A "MediaWiki Foundation" has been proposed a few times and I
> suspect continues to have some currency within WMF.

This past January at the Developer Summit[1], there was an
unconference session for a meeting between the MediaWiki Stakeholders
(represented by Cindy Cicalese and myself) and the WMF[2].

This meeting was better attended by WMF staffers than I expected it to be
and, with the encouragement of some of those in attendance, we began a
series of follow-on meetings to explore interest in and discuss the process 
around
constructing an organisation focused on MediaWiki development -
not only for the WMF but also for third party users of MediaWiki
(including, as Erik hinted, organisations as diverse the W3C, NASA,
NATO, major oil companies and pharmaceuticals).

We've since held three meetings[3][4][5] and have planned two more.
During the meeting planned for about six weeks from now[6], we intend
to have a format that allows us to respond to questions or concerns from
the larger community.

If you would like to be a part of the planning and creation of this
organisation, please contact myself, Cindy Cicalese, or Markus Glaser. We 
welcome your input.

Footnotes: 
[1]  https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Developer_Summit_2016
[2]  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T119403
[3]  https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/i8XjsnBxxh/timeslider#5797
[4]  https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/MWF20160226/timeslider#959
[5]  https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/MWF20160318/timeslider#1334
[6]  http://mwstake.org/mwstake/wiki/Event:30

-- 
Mark A. Hershberger
NicheWork LLC
717-271-1084



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

Steinsplitter,

There has been and continues to be a long standing desire from volunteers
and donors to get merchandise whether through events, competitions,
giveaways or purchasing. The fact we get 1000+ orders or so a year (an
educated guess) shows the idea of the store has merits. It might not be for
everyone but if it serves those who use it and it's self sufficient then I
don't see many negatives of having one. Especially if we ensure there are
multiple other avenues for users to get such merchandise, especially to
ensure that cost is not a limiting factor within our movement. It would be
great if the store could fund all such merchandise giveaways.

Seddon

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:39 PM, Steinsplitter Wiki <
steinsplitter-w...@live.com> wrote:

> Why do we need such a Shop?
>
> (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the
> shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
>
> I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia
> servers.
>
> --Steinsplitter
>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> > From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> >
> > How many orders are handled by this shop?
> >
> > Rupert
> > On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:
> >
> > > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> wikimedia
> > > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've
> raised.
> > > But moving in-house would require resources for building and
> maintaining an
> > > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> > > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> > > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> > >
> > > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc.
> and
> > > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and
> money.
> > > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need
> to
> > > keep it as efficient as possible.
> > >
> > > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> frameworks
> > > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github
> [1] and
> > > I would encourage you to take a look.
> > >
> > > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> > > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> hosted
> > > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> > >  wrote:
> > > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is
> acceptable for
> > > a
> > > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that
> does
> > > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds,
> that
> > > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external
> supplier is
> > > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> > > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone
> good or
> > > even
> > > >> adequate ones.
> > > >>
> > > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run
> on
> > > the
> > > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required
> to
> > > > browse and purchase?
> > >
> > > I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> > > Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> > > However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> > > JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> > > as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
> > >
> > > > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
> > >
> > > IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> > > domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
> > >
> > > Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> > > free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> > > of use and privacy policy.
> > >
> > > If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> > > comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> > > on a different domain, p

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Have you considered the cost? It is not free to run a shop. When another
organisation can do it for you for less, it would be not good to have an
own shop on principles only.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 21 March 2016 at 20:39, Steinsplitter Wiki 
wrote:

> Why do we need such a Shop?
>
> (I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the
> shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)
>
> I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia
> servers.
>
> --Steinsplitter
>
> > Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> > From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> > To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> >
> > How many orders are handled by this shop?
> >
> > Rupert
> > On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:
> >
> > > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> wikimedia
> > > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've
> raised.
> > > But moving in-house would require resources for building and
> maintaining an
> > > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> > > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> > > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> > >
> > > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc.
> and
> > > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and
> money.
> > > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need
> to
> > > keep it as efficient as possible.
> > >
> > > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> frameworks
> > > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github
> [1] and
> > > I would encourage you to take a look.
> > >
> > > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> > > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> hosted
> > > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > Seddon
> > >
> > > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> > >  wrote:
> > > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > > >>
> > > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is
> acceptable for
> > > a
> > > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that
> does
> > > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds,
> that
> > > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external
> supplier is
> > > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> > > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone
> good or
> > > even
> > > >> adequate ones.
> > > >>
> > > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run
> on
> > > the
> > > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required
> to
> > > > browse and purchase?
> > >
> > > I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> > > Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> > > However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> > > JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> > > as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
> > >
> > > > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
> > >
> > > IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> > > domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
> > >
> > > Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> > > free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> > > of use and privacy policy.
> > >
> > > If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> > > comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> > > on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
> > > so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.
> > >
> > > --
> > > John Vandenberg
> > >
> > > ___
> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > > 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Steinsplitter Wiki]

Why do we need such a Shop?

(I must admit that i tested the job a year ago, the product was fine, the 
shipment fast. A bit expensive for my taste.)

I agree with other users that the shop schould be hosted on wikimedia servers.

--Steinsplitter

> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2016 17:41:46 +0100
> From: rupert.thur...@gmail.com
> To: wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?
> 
> How many orders are handled by this shop?
> 
> Rupert
> On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:
> 
> > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully wikimedia
> > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
> > But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining an
> > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> >
> > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
> > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and money.
> > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
> > keep it as efficient as possible.
> >
> > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the frameworks
> > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1] and
> > I would encourage you to take a look.
> >
> > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is hosted
> > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> >  wrote:
> > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > >>
> > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for
> > a
> > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
> > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
> > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > >>
> > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
> > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or
> > even
> > >> adequate ones.
> > >>
> > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > >>
> > >
> > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
> > the
> > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> > > browse and purchase?
> >
> > I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> > Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> > However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> > JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> > as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
> >
> > > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
> >
> > IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> > domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
> >
> > Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> > free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> > of use and privacy policy.
> >
> > If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> > comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> > on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
> > so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.
> >
> > --
> > John Vandenberg
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
> https://meta.

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

I don't have numbers of orders to hand but revenue projections for the
store can be seen on Slide 12 here:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/WMF_Advancement_and_Fundraising_Tech_quarterly_review_-_Q2_FY2015-16.pdf

FY 15/16 Projections:

Gross Revenue: $74,383.34
Net Revenue: $29,933.74

Regards
Seddon

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 4:41 PM, rupert THURNER 
wrote:

> How many orders are handled by this shop?
>
> Rupert
> On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:
>
> > In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully
> wikimedia
> > hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
> > But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining
> an
> > ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> > setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> > power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> > movement as I am sure you would agree.
> >
> > Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> > ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
> > making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and
> money.
> > Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> > payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
> > keep it as efficient as possible.
> >
> > As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the
> frameworks
> > that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1]
> and
> > I would encourage you to take a look.
> >
> > With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> > sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> > certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is
> hosted
> > by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Seddon
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
> >  wrote:
> > > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> > >>
> > >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable
> for
> > a
> > >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
> > >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
> > >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> > >>
> > >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier
> is
> > >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> > >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> > >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good
> or
> > even
> > >> adequate ones.
> > >>
> > >> -- Coren / Marc
> > >>
> > >
> > > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
> > the
> > > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> > > browse and purchase?
> >
> > I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> > Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> > However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> > JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> > as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
> >
> > > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
> >
> > IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> > domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
> >
> > Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> > free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> > of use and privacy policy.
> >
> > If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> > comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> > on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
> > so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.
> >
> > --
> > John Vandenberg
> >
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> > ___
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> > 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailin

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[rupert THURNER]

How many orders are handled by this shop?

Rupert
On Mar 21, 2016 17:32, "Joseph Seddon"  wrote:

> In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully wikimedia
> hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
> But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining an
> ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
> setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
> power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
> movement as I am sure you would agree.
>
> Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
> ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
> making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and money.
> Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
> payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
> keep it as efficient as possible.
>
> As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the frameworks
> that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1] and
> I would encourage you to take a look.
>
> With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
> sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
> certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is hosted
> by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.
>
> Regards
>
> Seddon
>
> On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
>  wrote:
> > Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
> >>
> >> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for
> a
> >>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
> >>
> >>
> >> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
> >> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
> >> intersect very little with our own tech).
> >>
> >> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
> >> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
> >> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
> >> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or
> even
> >> adequate ones.
> >>
> >> -- Coren / Marc
> >>
> >
> > My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
> the
> > customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> > browse and purchase?
>
> I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
> Shopify specific code for making purchases.
> However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
> JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
> as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.
>
> > And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!
>
> IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
> domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.
>
> Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
> free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
> of use and privacy policy.
>
> If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
> comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
> on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
> so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.
>
> --
> John Vandenberg
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

In an ideal world then I would definitely be pushing for a fully wikimedia
hosted online shop. I completely agree with the principles you've raised.
But moving in-house would require resources for building and maintaining an
ecommerce workflow that I don't think we collectively can justify. The
setup and maintenance of any solution would require a degree of people
power that I personally think could be spent better elsewhere in the
movement as I am sure you would agree.

Throwing together an e-commerce site can be easy. But doing it well,
ensuring you are PCI compliant, ensuring its stable, secure etc. etc. and
making it user friendly both front and back end. That takes time and money.
Even if we did all that we would still in end up using a third party
payment gateway. To ensure the shop is viable and not a drain we need to
keep it as efficient as possible.

As Marc said Shopify may not be completely FLOSS but many of the frameworks
that Shopify use in their hosted service are on available on Github [1] and
I would encourage you to take a look.

With regards to the URL, I as a customer would find a top 10 website
sending me to a third party URL for their shop highly suspicious and I
certainly could treat it with suspicion. Making it clear that it is hosted
by shopify I think would at least improve the situation.

Regards

Seddon

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
 wrote:
> Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
>>
>> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
>>>
>>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for
a
>>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
>> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
>> intersect very little with our own tech).
>>
>> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
>> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
>> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
>> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or
even
>> adequate ones.
>>
>> -- Coren / Marc
>>
>
> My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on
the
> customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> browse and purchase?

I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
Shopify specific code for making purchases.
However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.

> And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!

IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.

Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
of use and privacy policy.

If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Scholarship Decline

[Rodrigo Padula]

I had a conversation with Vitor Mazuco about this email and agreed with his 
point of view.

Analyzing the list of users from Brazil that received schollarships from WMF 
during the last years, I noted that WMF/Scholarship Committees are always 
supporting the same group of people not generating opportunities for new 
people(and very important contributors) to join and enjoy Wikimania.

Including, some of the users that received support to go to Wikimania never 
provided any feedback to our community regarding Wikimania experience, 
learnings, knowledge acquired or any kind of reports.

I think the scholarship committee should take in consideration those who have 
been to the event several times, so that we can also include more people, 
increasing the Wikimania's diversity in all possible ways, avoid so many 
repetitions engaging more people into this international movement.

I'm not saying that the users that received support in recent years do not 
deserve this support, my point is that we have more people who also deserve to 
go to Wikimania and never get this opportunity, sometimes it disengage our 
volunteers.

Rodrigo Padula
Coordenador de Projetos
Grupo Wikimedia Brasileiro de Educação e Pesquisa
http://www.wikimedia.org.br
21 99326-0558


--- Em Qui, 17 Mar 2016 20:32:36 -0300 Ellie Young  
escreveu  
Vitor,

I have asked the Scholarship Committee for Wikimania '16 to reply to your
email.
wikimania-scholarsh...@wikimedia.org

Ellie Young
WMF Events Manager


On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 12:30 PM, Vitor Mazuco 
wrote:

> Hi everybody!
>
> my apply was decline.
>
> This is my second time that is decline, and my friend of Brazil goes
> every year, same users in every year and I never.
>
> If do you compare my contribution as long with their, I have much more
> and my apply is every year decline by WMF.
>
> Please, who can help with this?
>
> Thanks in advanced,
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> ;




-
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
;



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

What your saying makes sense. I'll take a look into this Jon and get back
to you as soon as I can.

Seddon
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Joseph Seddon 
wrote:
> Hey Florence,
>
> Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
> hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
> our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2]

That it is run by Shopify appears to only be stated on the shipping page:
http://store.wikimedia.org/pages/shipping

https://www.google.com/search?q=shopify+site%3Astore.wikimedia.org

I think it would be appropriate to explicitly & prominently mention this on

https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/terms-of-service
https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/privacy-policy

Especially the Privacy policy, since it says

"The Wikipedia store is operated by third-party service providers,
and, as part of their operations, they may process your information.
Please consult their privacy policies for further information."

And then doesnt say who those third party service providers are.

Here in Indonesia, when I go to https://shopify.com, I am forcibly
sent to https://www.shopify.co.id/ , and when I click on Terms of Use
or Privacy I am sent to 404 pages.

https://www.shopify.co.id/legal/terms
https://www.shopify.co.id/legal/privacy

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 7:34 PM, Ricordisamoa
 wrote:
> Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:
>>
>> On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
>>>
>>> As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for a
>>> FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.
>>
>>
>> While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does
>> contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that
>> intersect very little with our own tech).
>>
>> I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is
>> all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without
>> hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every
>> service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or even
>> adequate ones.
>>
>> -- Coren / Marc
>>
>
> My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on the
> customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required to
> browse and purchase?

I very quickly looked, and it appears to be mostly open libraries and
Shopify specific code for making purchases.
However any amount of tracking could be hidden somewhere in their
JavaScript, and an audit today doesnt mean it is safe to use tomorrow,
as the source code is not publicly reviewed before being deployed.

> And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!

IMO it is more important that any service on the "wikimedia.org"
domain (and others owned by WMF) is free software.

Outsourcing the service provision is fine, provided the software is
free software and the delegated service provider abides by our terms
of use and privacy policy.

If we need to run non-free services, that isnt free software or can't
comply with our terms of use and privacy policy, it should be hosted
on a different domain, preferrably the domain of the service provider
so that it is abundantly clear who the transaction is really with.

-- 
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[John Mark Vandenberg]

On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 5:28 PM, Joseph Seddon  wrote:
> Hey Florence,
>
> Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
> hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
> our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2]

That it is run by Shopify appears to only be stated on the shipping page:
http://store.wikimedia.org/pages/shipping

https://www.google.com/search?q=shopify+site%3Astore.wikimedia.org

I think it would be appropriate to explicitly & prominently mention this on

https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/terms-of-service
https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/privacy-policy

Especially the Privacy policy, since it says

"The Wikipedia store is operated by third-party service providers,
and, as part of their operations, they may process your information.
Please consult their privacy policies for further information."

And then doesnt say who those third party service providers are.

Here in Indonesia, when I go to https://shopify.com, I am forcibly
sent to https://www.shopify.co.id/ , and when I click on Terms of Use
or Privacy I am sent to 404 pages.

https://www.shopify.co.id/legal/terms
https://www.shopify.co.id/legal/privacy

--
John Vandenberg

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 2016-03-21 8:34 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too! 


Yes, and no.

The extra control is hypothetically nice, but in practice one-off 
services that are different from the rest of the infrastructure (as a 
shop would be, like the blog, OTRS, etc) tend to be *extremely* 
expensive and difficult to care for, and tend to be the very weakest 
points of the system (including privacy and security).


There's a question of lack of specific expertise, of multiplication of 
moving parts, and of limited brain share to spread around a limited 
operations team.  I think it's wiser and safer to contract those out to 
a provider that (a) manages this as their core business and (b) is 
responsible for maintenance and security.  (The blog is a very good 
example of how much improvement can come as a result of delegating to a 
provider that actually has the expertise and resources to run the service).


There are cases - because of our privacy policy or because of how 
closely things tie into the rest of our infrastructure - where bringing 
in a one-off service is the best thing to do; but even those cases tend 
to be inordinately resource-heavy for their relative size so are best 
avoided when possible.


-- Coren / Marc


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Ricordisamoa]

Il 21/03/2016 13:14, Marc A. Pelletier ha scritto:

On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable 
for a FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance. 


While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does 
contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that 
intersect very little with our own tech).


I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier 
is all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck 
without hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not 
every service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone 
good or even adequate ones.


-- Coren / Marc



My concern was about the (likely proprietary) JavaScript that is run on 
the customers' devices, but it turns out that it isn't actually required 
to browse and purchase?

And yes, it'd be nice if the server side was under WMF's control too!

___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Marc A. Pelletier]

On 2016-03-21 8:03 AM, Ricordisamoa wrote:
As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable 
for a FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance. 


While Shopify isn't FLOSS-only, they're a fairly okay place that does 
contribute to FLOSS themselves (mostly in the Ruby and Go worlds, that 
intersect very little with our own tech).


I don't think it's reasonable to expect that every external supplier is 
all-FLOSS.  For one, the movement would be pretty much stuck without 
hardware, networking gear, and power at the very least.  Not every 
service/provider even *have* pure-FLOSS alternative - let alone good or 
even adequate ones.


-- Coren / Marc


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Ricordisamoa]

As in [1] I'd like to know whether the use of Shopify is acceptable for 
a FOSS-friendly organization. Thanks in advance.


[1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_merchandise#Shopify.3F

Il 21/03/2016 11:28, Joseph Seddon ha scritto:

Hey Florence,

Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2] We have a staff contractor, Gretchen
Holtman, who runs the shop for the Wikimedia Foundation. [3]

The email address is responded to by Wikimedia Foundation staff typically
either Gretchen for regarding issues surrounding the Wikimedia Shop, or
myself in relation to the merchandise giveaway scheme. [4]

Feel free to contact me off list if there is anything I can help you with.

Seddon

[1] https://www.shopify.co.uk/
[2] https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/our-fulfillment-company
[3]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors#Fundraising_Operations
[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:


Is that directly run by Wikimedia Foundation staff or is that run by an
independant company "paid" by WMF to manage the shop ?

Who is behind the email address merchand...@wikimedia.org ?

Thank you

Florence


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,








___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Florence Devouard]

Thank you

I sent you a private email.

Flo

Le 21/03/16 11:28, Joseph Seddon a écrit :

Hey Florence,

Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2] We have a staff contractor, Gretchen
Holtman, who runs the shop for the Wikimedia Foundation. [3]

The email address is responded to by Wikimedia Foundation staff typically
either Gretchen for regarding issues surrounding the Wikimedia Shop, or
myself in relation to the merchandise giveaway scheme. [4]

Feel free to contact me off list if there is anything I can help you with.

Seddon

[1] https://www.shopify.co.uk/
[2] https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/our-fulfillment-company
[3]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors#Fundraising_Operations
[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:


Is that directly run by Wikimedia Foundation staff or is that run by an
independant company "paid" by WMF to manage the shop ?

Who is behind the email address merchand...@wikimedia.org ?

Thank you

Florence


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,










___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Joseph Seddon]

Hey Florence,

Regarding your first question the shop is Foundation owned and run but
hosted by Shopify, an e-commerce provider. [1] The orders are then sent to
our fulfillment partner, SWAGBOT. [2] We have a staff contractor, Gretchen
Holtman, who runs the shop for the Wikimedia Foundation. [3]

The email address is responded to by Wikimedia Foundation staff typically
either Gretchen for regarding issues surrounding the Wikimedia Shop, or
myself in relation to the merchandise giveaway scheme. [4]

Feel free to contact me off list if there is anything I can help you with.

Seddon

[1] https://www.shopify.co.uk/
[2] https://store.wikimedia.org/pages/our-fulfillment-company
[3]
https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Staff_and_contractors#Fundraising_Operations
[4] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Merchandise_giveaways
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Florence Devouard 
wrote:

> Is that directly run by Wikimedia Foundation staff or is that run by an
> independant company "paid" by WMF to manage the shop ?
>
> Who is behind the email address merchand...@wikimedia.org ?
>
> Thank you
>
> Florence
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 




-- 
Seddon

*Advancement Associate (Community Engagement)*
*Wikimedia Foundation*
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Who runs the Wikimedia Shop ?

[Florence Devouard]

Is that directly run by Wikimedia Foundation staff or is that run by an 
independant company "paid" by WMF to manage the shop ?


Who is behind the email address merchand...@wikimedia.org ?

Thank you

Florence


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Facebook updates "community standards" for a "diverse global community"

[Kalliope Tsouroupidou]

I agree that mass removal of photos depicting full-nudity statues (and in
some cases erotic scenes, including intercourse[1]) or paintings of
undisputed historical significance would be more harmful than useful and
our policy should be inclusive of such material.

Given the different (:educational) context of Commons from that of
Facebook's, I think adopting their policy 'as is' would not best serve our
community. It can, however, serve as an inspirational starting point that
we can build upon and adjust, to suit Commons' purpose and mission.

K.

[1]
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6e/Khajuraho-Vishvanath_Temple_erotic_detal4.jpg


On Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Fæ  wrote:

> I liked Facebooks' careful definition of what constitutes nudity.
> Though their new policy would allow for diagrams of genitals for
> medical education, it would be tough for Commons to adopt similar
> anti-nudity laws without deleting a lot of historical and culturally
> relevant photographs, plus all the 19th century oil paintings where
> every other famous work seems to have a bare-chested woman in it. Oh
> and of course, all those naughty shots of Roman antiquities with their
> depictions of satyrs and gymnasts with their prominent buttocks and
> junk hanging out.
>
> It's a bit sad that a policy like this would not stop all those
> damn-awful amateur shots of girls in bikinis on a beach holiday being
> uploaded every year.
>
> Yeah, let's park this idea.
>
> Fae
>
> On 20 March 2016 at 10:25, Andy Mabbett  wrote:
> > On 19 Mar 2016 13:47, "Toby Dollmann"  wrote:
> >
> >> Much of it is relevant for WM Commons.
> >
> > How so? Commons has a very different purpose to Facebook.
> >
> > --
> > Andy Mabbett
> --
> fae...@gmail.com https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Fae
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Kalliope Tsouroupidou
Community Advocate
Wikimedia Foundation
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,