Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On 01/06/11 01:49, Happy-melon wrote: > The most likely outcome of this particular suggestion is simply to > radically reduce the amount of code being committed. I fully support the idea of reducing the amount of code. My main issue is where to send the code: - bugzilla as an attached patch ?

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89231]: New comment added

User "Jack Phoenix" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89231. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89231#c17411 Commit summary: followup r89188: markup style improved, generation of term/definition html moved completely into Element, code formatting Comment: As far as cod

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:13 AM, Brion Vibber wrote: > "OMG my commit will be wasted in 20 >> minutes! Heeelponeone" is not the best scenario for clear thinking. >> Time pressure might result in people reviewing stuff they're less >> familiar with, and reviews being done in a haste, so CR quality

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89231]: New comment added

User "F.trott" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89231. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89231#c17412 Commit summary: followup r89188: markup style improved, generation of term/definition html moved completely into Element, code formatting Comment: True. I always mix

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

"Chad" wrote in message news:banlktinrbx45wsg6yyclwpzpo7mjb3r...@mail.gmail.com... > On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 7:49 PM, Happy-melon wrote: >> Every way of phrasing or describing the problem with MW CR can be boiled >> down to one simple equation: "not enough qualified people are not >> spending

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89231]: Revision status changed

User "Reedy" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89231. Old Status: new New Status: deferred Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89231#c0 Commit summary: followup r89188: markup style improved, generation of term/definition html moved completely into Element, code format

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89230]: New comment added

User "Hashar" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89230. Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89230#c17413 Commit summary: The big regex at doMagicLinks deserves being more thoroughly studied. Comment: We have a benchmarking class to assist you in w

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r84428]: New comment added

User "Hashar" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r84428. Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/84428#c17414 Commit summary: branch trunk@r84386 to play with the pretty URL feature Comment: branch abandoned. marking ok. __

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89113]: Revision status changed

User "Hashar" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89113. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89113#c0 Commit summary: Fleshed out file ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing lis

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r45497]: New comment added

User "Krinkle" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r45497. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/45497#c17415 Commit summary: * Made it possible to set $wgLogo to false and have no logo. Made this the default, installer-configurable. * Introduced $wgDeletedDirectory to replace

Re: [Wikitech-l] Software "First aid checklist"

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 2:38 AM, Thomas Gries wrote: > Hi developers, > > for streamlining (my) support (to users), I created a kind of > >    first aid checklist [1] > > which I ask users coming with questions to read and answer first. If > possible. > > - adapted to my needs > - comprises most of

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89249]: Revision status changed

User "Catrope" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89249. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89249#c0 Commit summary: Fix for r89248: don't run the regex if findIE6Extension returns false. Only affects performance,

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89248]: Revision status changed

User "Catrope" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89248. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89248#c0 Commit summary: * Only blacklist query string extensions which match /^[a-zA-Z0-9_-]+$/. This avoids blacklistin

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89245]: Revision status changed

User "Catrope" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89245. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89245#c0 Commit summary: Fixes for r3, r89197: * Modified WebRequest::findIE6Extension() to fix the performance issue

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89197]: Revision status changed

User "Catrope" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89197. Old Status: new New Status: resolved Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89197#c0 Commit summary: Tests for r3, including two failing tests. ___

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r88883]: New comment added

User "Catrope" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r3. Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/3#c17416 Commit summary: (bug 28840) URLs with dots break because of IE6 security check * Replace the overly paranoid regex with a function that simula

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89258]: New comment added

User "Catrope" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89258. Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89258#c17417 Commit summary: (bug 29224) Also use a packed modules string for the startup modules (usually there's only one, but there's a hook to add more

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89260]: New comment added

User "Siebrand" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89260. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89260#c17418 Commit summary: * moved infobox to Html (r88109#c16937) Comment: While you're at it: you should probably use the Html class instead of the Xml class for openElement

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89260]: New comment added

User "Freakolowsky" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89260. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89260#c17419 Commit summary: * moved infobox to Html (r88109#c16937) Comment: done ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawik

Re: [Wikitech-l] Status of more regular code deployments

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:43 AM, Brion Vibber wrote: >> substantially >> broken, BECAUSE ***THEY'RE NOT USING IT*** FOR THINGS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO >> THEM. > > > That's not correct -- the same code review tools are being used to look over > and comment on those things, AND THEN THE DAMN THING ACT

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:49 AM, Happy-melon wrote: > By far the most likely outcome of this is that in the two months following > its introduction, 95% of all commits are reverted, because the people who > are supposed to be reviewing them don't spend any more time than usual > reviewing them.  If

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Roan Kattouw wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:49 AM, Happy-melon wrote: >> By far the most likely outcome of this is that in the two months following >> its introduction, 95% of all commits are reverted, because the people who >> are supposed to be reviewing them

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89262]: Revision status changed

User "Siebrand" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89262. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89262#c0 Commit summary: * used Html static functions instead og Xml. (r89260#c17418) ___ MediaWiki-C

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89263]: New comment added

User "^demon" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89263. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89263#c17420 Commit summary: * suggestion for ExtensionUpdater that would handle DB install/update of extension from DatabaseUpdater * could also generate default code for LocalSett

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89262]: New comment added

User "Freakolowsky" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89262. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89262#c17421 Commit summary: * used Html static functions instead og Xml. (r89260#c17418) Comment: could you also change status on previous commits? r89260 r88109 _

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89263]: New comment added

User "Freakolowsky" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89263. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89263#c17422 Commit summary: * suggestion for ExtensionUpdater that would handle DB install/update of extension from DatabaseUpdater * could also generate default code for Loc

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89001]: New comment added

User "Catrope" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89001. Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89001#c17423 Commit summary: Fix issue on the live site causing RL requests for ext.uploadWizard to consistently take more than 5 seconds: the cache freshn

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r88513]: New comment added

User "Catrope" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r88513. Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/88513#c17424 Commit summary: Adding mw.util.wikiScript + small fix in mediawiki.action.watch.ajax.js * Moving wiki* functions together in mediawiki.util.js

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89114]: New comment added

User "Catrope" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89114. Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89114#c17425 Commit summary: Fix a regression from r63144: "Fixed bizarre $time comparison (compared display time and a UNIX const time)" That's not correc

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89261]: Revision status changed

User "Reedy" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89261. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89261#c0 Commit summary: Whitespace updates. ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Chad wrote: > I don't think "revert in 72 hours if its unreviewed" is a good idea. It > just discourages people from contributing to areas in which we only > have one reviewer looking at code. > I also don't really like it. But I do think we should be more liberal a

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On 01.06.2011, 7:59 Mark wrote: > "The Tiki community is a heavy user of SVN. While many open source > communities have a send-a-patch-and-someone-else-will-commit > approach, in Tiki, we encourage everyone to commit directly to the > source code. Think of it as applying the Wiki Way to software

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On 01.06.2011, 20:00 Roan wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Chad wrote: >> I don't think "revert in 72 hours if its unreviewed" is a good idea. It >> just discourages people from contributing to areas in which we only >> have one reviewer looking at code. >> > I also don't really like it.

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

That's because our phpunit setup is incredibly fragile. I'm trying to fix it. -Chad On Jun 1, 2011 12:09 PM, "Max Semenik" wrote: > On 01.06.2011, 20:00 Roan wrote: > >> On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Chad wrote: >>> I don't think "revert in 72 hours if its unreviewed" is a good idea. It >>> ju

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Roan Kattouw wrote: > This, for me, is the remaining problem with the 72-hour rule. If I > happen to commit a SecurePoll change during a hackathon in Europe just > as Tim leaves for the airport to go home, it's pretty much guaranteed > that he won't be able to look

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89270]: Revision status changed

User "Jeroen De Dauw" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89270. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/mediawiki/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89270#c0 Commit summary: fixed typo ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing l

[Wikitech-l] tests for branches (was: Code review process)

[Forking thread "Code review process"] On 01/06/11 09:58, Max Semenik wrote: > To make this reasonable, we would also need to run tests for branches > on the central server, too - CruiseControl doesn't look flexible enough > for this. Hello, I am planning to add the REL1_18 branch to the CruiseCo

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 8:23 AM, Roan Kattouw wrote: > This, for me, is the remaining problem with the 72-hour rule. If I > happen to commit a SecurePoll change during a hackathon in Europe just > as Tim leaves for the airport to go home, it's pretty much guaranteed > that he won't be able to look

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 8:28 AM, Chad wrote: > I *do* think we should enforce a 48hr "revert if broken" rule. If you > can't be bothered to clean up your breakages in within 48 hours of > putting your original patch in, it must not have been very important. > Officially speaking, since forever we

Re: [Wikitech-l] tests for branches (was: Code review process)

On 01.06.2011, 20:56 Ashar wrote: > [Forking thread "Code review process"] > On 01/06/11 09:58, Max Semenik wrote: >> To make this reasonable, we would also need to run tests for branches >> on the central server, too - CruiseControl doesn't look flexible enough >> for this. > Hello, > I am plan

[Wikitech-l] about fixing broken tests in cruisecontrol

Max Seminik raised the issue of codurr spamming the channel with a useless list of revisions that broke the tests. Example: [19:39:08] Something broke. See . Possible culprits: aashrh/r89027 /r89028 /r89029 nbiabriket/r

Re: [Wikitech-l] tests for branches (was: Code review process)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Max Semenik wrote: > On 01.06.2011, 20:56 Ashar wrote: > > I am planning to add the REL1_18 branch to the CruiseControl system as a > > new project The prerequisite being to make it works for trunk :-) > > Would be great! Though even greater would be to ditch C

Re: [Wikitech-l] tests for branches (was: Code review process)

On 01/06/11 19:28, Max Semenik wrote: > every private branch can be easily tested *before* being > merged into trunk. You can test the private branch by running the test suite locally before and after merging. Private branch requiring continuous integration would probably big projects, and add

Re: [Wikitech-l] tests for branches (was: Code review process)

On 01.06.2011, 21:34 Ashar wrote: > On 01/06/11 19:28, Max Semenik wrote: >> every private branch can be easily tested *before* being >> merged into trunk. > You can test the private branch by running the test suite locally > before and after merging. Private branch requiring continuous > int

Re: [Wikitech-l] Status of more regular code deployments

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:58 AM, Roan Kattouw wrote: > Alright, we've had fun with all caps for a while, so let's focus on > solutions now. > Ok, I'm turning in my caps lock key. ;) > So let me sketch how I see us getting there. > > 1. Get 1.18 reviewed > 2a. Get 1.18 deployed and released > 2b

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 1:28 AM, Chad wrote: > I don't think "revert in 72 hours if its unreviewed" is a good idea. It > just discourages people from contributing to areas in which we only > have one reviewer looking at code. > > I *do* think we should enforce a 48hr "revert if broken" rule. If you

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

+1 I believe the way forward involves using pre-commit review, requiring test coverage to pass review, and developers working in branches at all times. SVN may be a pita when it comes to branches, but that's a solvable problem. - Trevor On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 10:52 AM, Andrew Garrett wrote: > O

Re: [Wikitech-l] about fixing broken tests in cruisecontrol

Ashar, Just a quick note thanking you for your hard, continuing work on this. -Sumana -- Sumana Harihareswara Volunteer Development Coordinator Wikimedia Foundation ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.or

Re: [Wikitech-l] about fixing broken tests in cruisecontrol

Ashar Voultoiz writes: > Max Seminik raised the issue of codurr spamming the channel with a > useless list of revisions that broke the tests. Ashar, Thank you SO MUCH for tracking this down. Although I set up CruiseControl, I really haven't had a lot of time recently to track down the problems

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89274]: Revision status changed

User "Krinkle" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89274. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89274#c0 Commit summary: Fixes bug #29222 by conditionally adding the clicktracking parameters to the returnto URL.

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89275]: Revision status changed

User "Reedy" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89275. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89275#c0 Commit summary: svn:eol-style native ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r67684]: New comment added

User "Brion VIBBER" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r67684. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/67684#c17426 Commit summary: Fixes for r61911: * Do not follow redirects by default. This breaks on safe_mode, and may potentially open security vulnerabilities in callers whi

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r67684]: New comment added

User "Brion VIBBER" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r67684. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/67684#c17427 Commit summary: Fixes for r61911: * Do not follow redirects by default. This breaks on safe_mode, and may potentially open security vulnerabilities in callers whi

Re: [Wikitech-l] Status of more regular code deployments

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 7:42 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: > That's one of the reasons actually assigning time for it should be helpful: > currently we have zero staff dedicated full-time to getting code ready for > deployment and deployed. We have several staff & contractors with it on > their list of d

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

Dear friends, please - can the discussion under this subject be continued in a forum ? Tom ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Thomas Gries wrote: > Dear friends, > > please - can the discussion under this subject be continued in a forum ? > What forum? I can't think of any place more suitable than this list. -Chad ___ Wikitech-l mailing list W

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On 01.06.2011, 23:17 Thomas wrote: > Dear friends, > please - can the discussion under this subject be continued in a forum ? What forum? wikitech-l is a list designed for discussions related to MediaWiki development and Wikimedia technical stuff. Exactly what we're discussing right now.

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:38 PM, Rob Lanphier wrote: > The genesis of the 72-hour idea was our discussion about what is > stopping us from pre-commit review.  The set of us in the office > discussing this felt it was pretty much just a tools issue; from a > policy point of view, we think it makes

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r88513]: New comment added

User "Duplicatebug" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r88513. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/88513#c17428 Commit summary: Adding mw.util.wikiScript + small fix in mediawiki.action.watch.ajax.js * Moving wiki* functions together in mediawiki.util.js * Adding Adding mw.u

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85288]: New comment added, and revision status changed

User "Reedy" changed the status of MediaWiki.r85288. Old Status: new New Status: fixme User "Reedy" also posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85288. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85288#c17429 Commit summary: Implement magic accessors for RequestContext variables: you

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: [snip] > The point is, people's code should only be rejected with some specific > reason that either a) lets them fix it and resubmit, or b) tells them > definitively that it's not wanted and they shouldn't waste further > effort or hope on the

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote: > So then what happens if volunteers' contributions aren't reviewed > promptly? Indeed, this is why we need to demonstrate that we can actually push code through the system on a consistent basis... until we can, nobody seems willing to trust

[Wikitech-l] Manual (book) Guide for MediaWiki developers

Using the recently enabled (thanks!) book creation function, I collected a first version of a book I need http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Wikinaut/Books/MediaWiki_Developer%27s_Guide as guide for new (and old) developers with some important pages. Since now, developers can print out their own

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:06 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: > "This isn't ready for core yet -- code looks a bit dense and we don't > understand some of what it's doing yet. Can you help explain why you coded > it this way and add some test cases?" IMO, this is totally fine as a reason to reject a commit

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89153]: New comment added, and revision status changed

User "Raymond" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89153. Old Status: deferred New Status: fixme User "Raymond" also posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89153. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89153#c17430 Commit summary: * Initial commit Comment: Please fix the encoding

[Wikitech-l] Archival for Web Citations (GSoC project)

Hi, I'm Kevin Brown, a GSoC student this year. I live in Melbourne, Florida and am attending Brevard Community College. My previous projects include work on bots on the English Wikipedia for tagging of uncategorized pages and new page patrol cleanup. Almost since the web’s inception, link rot has

[Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

> The problem isn't reverting commits that are bad, it's reverting > commits solely because they haven't been reviewed.  In a pre-commit > review system, the equivalent to the proposed 72-hour rule would be > letting unreviewed code languish without comment.  Both of these are > bad things. > > The

Re: [Wikitech-l] Archival for Web Citations (GSoC project)

You might want to dig into French Wikipedia. IIRC They run a link archival service (there was discussion about enabling it for English Wikipedia, but I don't think it came to anything) and might have some helpful material. I forget the name I'm afraid, it's discussed somewhere on the en.wiki Villa

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:53 PM, bawolff wrote: > As a volunteer person, I'm fine if code I commit is reverted based on > it sucking, being too complicated, being too ugly, etc provided there > is actually some objection to the code. However, I'd be rather > offended if it was reverted on the basi

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:17 PM, Thomas Gries wrote: > Dear friends, > > please - can the discussion under this subject be continued in a forum ? > > Tom Tom, if you might feel more comfortable following the discussion via a web interface, try news://news.gmane.org/gmane.science.linguistics.wikip

Re: [Wikitech-l] Archival for Web Citations (GSoC project)

Wikiwix, I think -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Archived_citations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_External_links/Webcitebot2 Kevin, you should check out the second link above for projects which are potentially similar to yours. Pete On 6/

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89153]: Revision status changed

User "Freakolowsky" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89153. Old Status: fixme New Status: new Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89153#c0 Commit summary: * Initial commit ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-code

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r64228]: New comment added

User "Reedy" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r64228. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/64228#c17431 Commit summary: (bug 15810) stop blocked admins from unblocking themselves or others. Comment: Never added to core user rights list, added in r89293 __

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 3:02 PM, Brion Vibber wrote: > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 1:53 PM, bawolff wrote: >> >> As a volunteer person, I'm fine if code I commit is reverted based on >> it sucking, being too complicated, being too ugly, etc provided there >> is actually some objection to the code. Howe

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

Max Semenik wrote: > I would wholeheartedly supoport the idea of making tests a mandatory > accompaniment to code. One latest example: we made latest security releases > without tests. Actually, we have made security releases that *broke* tests. (ie. tests got outdated) > This is bad not only bec

Re: [Wikitech-l] Archival for Web Citations (GSoC project)

Welcome Kevin, I tried to contact you a few days ago, but was unable to. Please create a wiki account (with email notifications enabled) and commit your USERINFO. ___ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/

Re: [Wikitech-l] Status of more regular code deployments

Roan Kattouw wrote: > So mostly, I think our immediate problems are: > * no agreed-upon strategy to tackle the problem (what do y'all think > about mine?) > * not enough man-hours spent on keeping up with new commits > ** ...presumably because employed people aren't given the time to work > on it a

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89291]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89291. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89291#c0 Commit summary: Document r89248,r89249 isQueryStringBad() ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing lis

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85288]: New comment added

User "Happy-melon" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85288. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85288#c17432 Commit summary: Implement magic accessors for RequestContext variables: you can now just call $context->request->stuff(), and that is internally mapped to the get

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89302]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89302. Old Status: new New Status: reverted Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89302#c0 Commit summary: Exclude Block tests until somebody fixes them, also cache listTables() result so we can skip some queries _

Re: [Wikitech-l] Status of more regular code deployments

MZMcBride wrote: > This topic has come up several times and each time, it seems like the people > with any kind of power are conspicuously absent. Where is Danese? Is she > subscribed to this list? Is she reading it? I'm not sure how it's really > possible for this issue to keep coming up and for t

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85288]: New comment added

User "Reedy" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85288. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85288#c17433 Commit summary: Implement magic accessors for RequestContext variables: you can now just call $context->request->stuff(), and that is internally mapped to the get access

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r85288]: New comment added

User "Reedy" posted a comment on MediaWiki.r85288. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/85288#c17434 Commit summary: Implement magic accessors for RequestContext variables: you can now just call $context->request->stuff(), and that is internally mapped to the get access

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89102]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89102. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89102#c0 Commit summary: More documentation for File ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-co

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89103]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89103. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89103#c0 Commit summary: More documentation in various files ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list medi

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89104]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89104. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89104#c0 Commit summary: Even more documentation in various files ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

"Brion Vibber" wrote in message news:BANLkTikTz=V77o8vYMxbA91dj=PNNbvO=w...@mail.gmail.com... > On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 12:43 PM, Aryeh Gregor > > wrote: > >> So then what happens if volunteers' contributions aren't reviewed >> promptly? > > > Indeed, this is why we need to demonstrate that we c

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89105]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89105. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89105#c0 Commit summary: And even more documentation in various files ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89106]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89106. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89106#c0 Commit summary: Followup r83140, fix undefined $id ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list media

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89119]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89119. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89119#c0 Commit summary: More documentation! ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89123]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89123. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89123#c0 Commit summary: Fix up a couple of deprecated calls Documentation ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview ma

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89040]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89040. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89040#c0 Commit summary: More parameter documentation!! ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89041]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89041. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89041#c0 Commit summary: Now that Hooks.php contains a class, moved wfRunHooks() definition to GlobalFunctions.php and removed its inclusion from S

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89043]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89043. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89043#c0 Commit summary: And some more parameter documentation!! ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list

Re: [Wikitech-l] Code review process (was: Status of more regular code deployments)

On Wed, Jun 1, 2011 at 4:41 PM, Happy-melon wrote: > +1. Pre-commit-review, post-commit-lifetime, branching, testing, whatever; > all of the suggestions I've seen so far are IMO doomed to fail because they > do not fix the underlying problem that not enough experienced manhours are > being dedic

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89198]: New comment added, and revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89198. Old Status: new New Status: ok User "^demon" also posted a comment on MediaWiki.r89198. Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89198#c17435 Commit summary: Suppress AFT from all print outputs. I am adding a @media rul

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89296]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89296. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89296#c0 Commit summary: MFT r89293 ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wi

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89293]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89293. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89293#c0 Commit summary: 'unblockself' right was never added to User::$mCoreRights Noticed while poking bug 27514

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89295]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89295. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89295#c0 Commit summary: MFT r89293 * (bug 27514) Make 'unblockself' available as a global permission

[MediaWiki-CodeReview] [MediaWiki r89012]: Revision status changed

User "^demon" changed the status of MediaWiki.r89012. Old Status: new New Status: ok Full URL: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:Code/MediaWiki/89012#c0 Commit summary: upd ___ MediaWiki-CodeReview mailing list mediawiki-coderev...@lists.wikimedia

  1   2   >