On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 7:23 AM, Gregory Varnum gregory.var...@gmail.comwrote:
Greetings,
Following discussions with Wikimedia developers more on the fringe and
not as engaged in frequent IRC or mailing list conversations, the request
for an announcements only mailing list came up. I wanted
On 30/06/12 07:23, Gregory Varnum wrote:
wikitech-announce will be used for occasional announcements on both MediaWiki
and broader Wikimedia developer related news items
How does the new wikitech-announce compare with the existing
wikitech-ambassadors?
They both seem to have a similar
My understanding is that one is meant for internal, vs. external developers,
focusing specifically on WMF projects. The description states: Coordination
of technology deployments across languages/projects and looking at the
archives it is mostly about localisation issues. My impression was
On Jun 30, 2012, at 9:17 AM, Gregory Varnum wrote:
On 30 Jun, 2012, at 2:59 AM, Platonides platoni...@gmail.com wrote:
On 30/06/12 07:23, Gregory Varnum wrote:
wikitech-announce will be used for occasional announcements on both
MediaWiki and broader Wikimedia developer related news items
There are several config change requests which are usually merged
within few hours.
The current process is that someone submit a patch which is directly
merged to production, ignoring any staging platform at all.
What we can do now, is to copy paste the diff and merge it by hand
into wmf-config
Practically, though, the difference is minimal. The ambassadors are
just the tech-savvy non-English-only interested users who spread the
word in the non-English Wikimedia world, which is exactly what happens
with any announcement English-only list.
The two differences I see are that
Support. I've tried to look at gerrit (I really have!), but it's very hard
to look at for long periods of time.
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Marcin Cieslak sa...@saper.info wrote:
As seen on IRC:
https://github.com/ooyala/barkeep/wiki/Comparing-Barkeep-to-other-code-review-tools
Hi Chris,
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 08:25:05AM -0600, Chris McMahon wrote:
P.S.: On a related note ... one could think about mocking the database
as a whole for PHPUnit tests. Thereby, one would get rid of
unnecessary database coupling for unit testing, get better
control/detection of side
On 30/06/12 14:24, Christian Aistleitner wrote:
In our case, Object A is the object we want to test.
B is an implementation of DatabaseBase.
B' is a mock implementation of DatabaseBase.
C is the load balancer / wfGetDB(...) / ... whatever layer you choose.
Typically, mocking the database is
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Marcin Cieslak sa...@saper.info wrote:
As seen on IRC:
https://github.com/ooyala/barkeep/wiki/Comparing-Barkeep-to-other-code-review-tools
The most prominent feature of Barkeep mentioned on this page is that
it was built for a post-commit review workflow. Given
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Marcin Cieslak sa...@saper.info wrote:
As seen on IRC:
https://github.com/ooyala/barkeep/wiki/Comparing-Barkeep-to-other-code-review-tools
The most prominent feature of Barkeep mentioned on this page is that
it was built for a post-commit review workflow.
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 04:06:37PM -0700, Roan Kattouw wrote:
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 2:20 PM, Marcin Cieslak sa...@saper.info wrote:
As seen on IRC:
https://github.com/ooyala/barkeep/wiki/Comparing-Barkeep-to-other-code-review-tools
The most prominent feature of Barkeep mentioned on
On Thu, Jun 28, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Krinkle krinklem...@gmail.com wrote:
Replies inline:
On Jun 28, 2012, at 7:38 PM, Jon Robson wrote:
# things rely on those inline styles whether we like it or not.
No... They rely on styles not //inline// styles. This is my main
problem with the current
I got curious about how workflows were implemented and since the
codebase is pretty small, I started digging around their code, but then
found some relevant information here:
https://github.com/ooyala/barkeep/issues/254
So, it appears that workflow is not part of barkeep itself since barkeep
On Sat, Jun 30, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Faidon Liambotis fai...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Well, in the ops puppet repo though, we very often +2 commits ourselves
and push them, instead of waiting for someone else to review/approve
them. You could argue that it's our workflow that it's wrong, but I just
15 matches
Mail list logo
