Re: [Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

Hi! > It seems there is disagreement about what the correct interpretation of NULL > in > the rev_content_model column is. Should NULL there mean > > (a) "the current page content model, as recorded in page_content_model" > > or should it mean > > (b) "the default for this title, no matter

Re: [Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

On Monday, July 11, 2016, Daniel Kinzler wrote: > Am 11.07.2016 um 17:43 schrieb Brian Wolff: >> To me, (b) makes more sense, as all the other fields in page represent the >> info for the current revision. Additionally all the fields in revision >> (except

Re: [Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

Am 11.07.2016 um 17:43 schrieb Brian Wolff: > To me, (b) makes more sense, as all the other fields in page represent the > info for the current revision. Additionally all the fields in revision > (except rev_deleted) are immutable and never change, and definitely dont > change interpretation based

[Wikitech-l] The Revision Scoring weekly update

Hey, This is the 12th weekly update from revision scoring team that we have sent to this mailing list. New developments: - We deployed ORES review tool in Russian and Portuguese Wikipedia! [1] [2] - Basic support for English Wiktionary and Czech Wikipedia is live in labs.[3] Soon

Re: [Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

Hi Jaime, thanks for the pointer! I had completely forgotten about that. A few thoughts about that RFC: * I have long thought that content_format is pretty pointless and redundant. I haven't seen any content model that uses different serialization formats (I wrote a few that support two, but

Re: [Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

On Monday, July 11, 2016, Daniel Kinzler wrote: > Hi Jaime, thanks for the pointer! I had completely forgotten about that. > > A few thoughts about that RFC: > > * I have long thought that content_format is pretty pointless and redundant. I > haven't seen any content

[Wikitech-l] BREAKING CHANGE, ACTION NEEDED: Flow Vagrant role split into 2

I've split the Flow MediaWiki-Vagrant role into two, to make things simpler for casual Flow users. If you don't have the Flow role enabled, you can stop reading now. The basic 'flow' role will no longer depend on External Store and other optional dependencies. You now need to do one of

[Wikitech-l] Weigh in on whether to finalize "Cases" section of CoC

Please comment on whether to approve the "Cases" section of the draft Code of conduct for technical spaces (https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Code_of_Conduct/Draft#Page:_Code_of_Conduct.2FCases). You can comment at

[Wikitech-l] 2016W28 ArchCom-RFC meeting: image and oldimage tables

Hi all, The ArchCom-RFC office hour is coming up soon (Wednesday, 21:00 UTC, 2pm PDT, 23:00 CEST). Our topic: image and oldimage tables (which are an artifact from when we had "cur" and "old" tables). Rumor has it that it was discussed at the 2011 Amsterdam Hackathon Phab task:

[Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

It seems there is disagreement about what the correct interpretation of NULL in the rev_content_model column is. Should NULL there mean (a) "the current page content model, as recorded in page_content_model" or should it mean (b) "the default for this title, no matter what page_content_model

Re: [Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 8:07 AM, Daniel Kinzler wrote: > There's another fix: never write null into rev_content_model. Always put > the > actual model ID there. That's pretty wasteful, but it's robust and > reliable. > This. We probably would have done this a long

Re: [Wikitech-l] Browser testing user satisfaction survey

A friendly reminder that the survey will close this Friday, July 15. We have received 15 responses so far. It would be great to get a few more this week. Thanks! Željko On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 5:50 PM, Željko Filipin wrote: > In order to improve browser testing tools,

Re: [Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 2:07 PM, Daniel Kinzler wrote: > It seems there is disagreement about what the correct interpretation of NULL > in > the rev_content_model column is. Should NULL there mean > What should we write into rev_content_model in the future Content

Re: [Wikitech-l] What's the "correct" content model when rev_content_model is NULL?

On Monday, July 11, 2016, Daniel Kinzler wrote: > It seems there is disagreement about what the correct interpretation of NULL in > the rev_content_model column is. Should NULL there mean > > (a) "the current page content model, as recorded in page_content_model" > >