On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 12:47 PM, Brian Wolff bawo...@gmail.com wrote:
Some of the responses are from people who work for the Wikimedia Foundation
(not the same thing as being a Wikimedian), however i am almost certain
they are responding in a personal capacity not an official one. If you are
I've done things like port mako templates to Google App Engine. As
mentioned by Jeremy Baron, the common problem to porting anything of
sufficient complexity is that you're not allowed to write files to the
disk. To get mako to work, since it caches compiled templates to disk, I
patched it to
On Apr 7, 2014 10:36 AM, Dan Andreescu dandree...@wikimedia.org wrote:
So you'd probably have to
redirect mediawiki to write files somewhere else more permanent. Google
Drive seems like a decent place but last time I tried, integrating Drive
with App Engine was silly hard. This might have
Re-sending with a more specific subject line. Timo and Roan, is
wikitech-l an okay place to discuss this?
--
Sumana
On 03/26/2014 02:09 PM, Jon Robson wrote:
Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [WikimediaMobile] Fwd: Mobile Core Features
front-end meetup technical notes
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 9:56 AM,
I remember I mentioned it once in IRC, and some people don't like it
because GAE is proprietary...
-Liangent
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Jeremy Baron jer...@tuxmachine.com wrote:
On Apr 7, 2014 10:36 AM, Dan Andreescu dandree...@wikimedia.org wrote:
So you'd probably have to
redirect
On Apr 7, 2014 11:40 AM, Liangent liang...@gmail.com wrote:
I remember I mentioned it once in IRC, and some people don't like it
because GAE is proprietary...
So is oracle. If someone wants to do the work…
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
After the deploy last Thursday various users on Village Pumps bug
reports and external sites (e.g. Twitter and Reddit) were informing us
that the new typography was unreadable. Sadly it was difficult to
distinguish whether this was simply a dislike of the new fonts or
something deeper related to a
On 07/04/14 20:19, Jon Robson wrote:
After the deploy last Thursday various users on Village Pumps bug
reports and external sites (e.g. Twitter and Reddit) were informing us
that the new typography was unreadable. Sadly it was difficult to
distinguish whether this was simply a dislike of the new
* Isarra Yos wrote:
5) Restore the status quo - specifying 'sans-serif' as the font, which
translates to the default font for the platform, had none of these
problems, and resulted in fonts for all platforms which were good for
those platforms (though perhaps not necessarily the best).
*
Am 07.04.2014 01:20 schrieb Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com:
On Sun, Apr 6, 2014 at 4:05 PM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski
tom...@twkozlowski.netwrote:
1. I am deeply uncomfortable with the fact that you are choosing un-free
fonts over free ones.
2. I am deeply uncomfortable with the fact
This. Let's go back to what we *know* worked.
-Chad
On Apr 7, 2014 1:52 PM, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote:
On 07/04/14 20:19, Jon Robson wrote:
After the deploy last Thursday various users on Village Pumps bug
reports and external sites (e.g. Twitter and Reddit) were informing us
On 07/04/14 21:03, Martijn Hoekstra wrote:
+1, but to me 'serif' rather than 'sans-serif' for the section headers is
nicer. YMMV and can certainly live with sans for section headers
Having different serif for the headers with sans-serif content can be a
bit dangerous, depending on the fonts in
On 07-04-2014 22:52, Isarra Yos wrote:
5) Restore the status quo - specifying 'sans-serif' as the font
+1 for option 5. I have posted my preliminary evaluation at [1] and [2],
which basically deals with why this update is so Latin-centric, and has
non-latin scripts users left with a totally
Chad writes:
This. Let's go back to what we *know* worked.
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/124387/ has already been merged, so you're
/just/ late – unless you want to submit yet another patch reverting to sans-
serif.
Tomasz
Oh, my use case is simple: I just want to run my own instance of MediaWiki
for my personal wiki. I need to move it from my current provider.
I thought App Engine would be kinda simple and cheap to run MediaWiki on,
but it looks like it has a few rough edges, and I am wondering whether it
is worth
Hi,
Sumana pinged me about this RFC but considering other things I am
working on that have a high priority, I'm unlikely to work on this in
the near future. If anyone is interested in picking it up, feel free to
do so.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Scoping_site_CSS
--
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Isarra Yos zhoris...@gmail.com wrote:
5) Restore the status quo - specifying 'sans-serif' as the font, which
translates to the default font for the platform, had none of these
problems, and resulted in fonts for all platforms which were good for those
platforms
I noticed from Kaldari's notes [1] that Open sans was rejected based
on language support and install base. I notice however that it is
pretty popular on the web [2,3]. Can someone elaborate on these
results as it is surprised me?
To me we can learn from this experience that install base
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Jon Robson jdlrob...@gmail.com wrote:
I noticed from Kaldari's notes [1] that Open sans was rejected based
on language support and install base. I notice however that it is
pretty popular on the web [2,3]. Can someone elaborate on these
results as it is
Private/offlist
Steven,
I think you're missing what Issara and others like myself have
suggested: just reverting the fontstack part, not the
font-size/color/etc that are a part of the changeset.
Greg
quote name=Steven Walling date=2014-04-07 time=15:41:02 -0700
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:52 PM,
quote name=Greg Grossmeier date=2014-04-07 time=15:57:39 -0700
Private/offlist
well crap.
--
| Greg GrossmeierGPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
| identi.ca: @gregA18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |
___
Wikitech-l mailing list
Sadly it was difficult to
distinguish whether this was simply a dislike of the new fonts or
something deeper related to a bug.
Since, you're changing something primarily for aesthetic purposes (I think
anyways, all the accounts of why we even would want to change the font are
very hand wavey
On 08-04-2014 00:45, Steven Walling wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Jon Robson jdlrob...@gmail.com wrote:
I noticed from Kaldari's notes [1] that Open sans was rejected based
on language support and install base.
A similar example is Google's Noto font (
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Tomasz W. Kozlowski
tom...@twkozlowski.netwrote:
Chad writes:
This. Let's go back to what we *know* worked.
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/124387/ has already been merged, so
you're
/just/ late – unless you want to submit yet another patch reverting to
I feel that I am not being taken seriously. Three times now I have indicated
what is wrong with this solution, namely that a single font stack cannot
possibly serve a global website.
I'm sorry you feel this way, if I wasn't clear, I agree with you, but
I think where we disagree is that we
If it is a public personal wiki take a look at Orain[1].
Would probably save rather a lot of effort in setup and maintenance!
Addshore
[1] https://meta.orain.org/wiki/Main_Page
On 7 April 2014 22:53, Denny Vrandečić vrande...@gmail.com wrote:
Oh, my use case is simple: I just want to run my
On 08-04-2014 01:14, Jon Robson wrote:
Yes I thought I had recognised this. See my message above: The
language support is more of an issue, but I wonder if this can be
resolved by specific font stacks with more suitable open fonts is
provided.
I think we have a great chance to iterate from here
Hi.
I've read through this thread and I've formulated two questions:
* Is there consensus to specify font-family: 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica,
Arial, sans-serif; in MediaWiki core?
* Is there an issue with specifying font-family: sans-serif; in
MediaWiki core?
Based on my reading of this
Hi everyone
I'm pleased to announce that Aaron Schulz is taking on a new role in
Wikimedia Foundation's Platform Team: Senior Performance Engineer.
Aaron works on MediaWiki internals -- components that every
user-visible feature depends on, but which are rarely user-visible
themselves. The
Yay! Congrats, Aaron!
Does this mean we can buy you a laptop that isn't audible from Canada? ;).
On 7 April 2014 17:40, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone
I'm pleased to announce that Aaron Schulz is taking on a new role in
Wikimedia Foundation's Platform Team: Senior
On 08/04/14 00:02, Steven Walling wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Erwin Dokter er...@darcoury.nl wrote:
I feel that I am not being taken seriously. Three times now I have
indicated what is wrong with this solution, namely that a single font stack
cannot possibly serve a global website.
On 4/7/14, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Erwin Dokter er...@darcoury.nl wrote:
I feel that I am not being taken seriously. Three times now I have
indicated what is wrong with this solution, namely that a single font
stack
cannot possibly serve
Congratulations, Aaron!
Dan
On 7 April 2014 17:40, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone
I'm pleased to announce that Aaron Schulz is taking on a new role in
Wikimedia Foundation's Platform Team: Senior Performance Engineer.
Aaron works on MediaWiki internals -- components
Awesome, congrats Aaron!
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:50 PM, Dan Garry dga...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Congratulations, Aaron!
Dan
On 7 April 2014 17:40, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone
I'm pleased to announce that Aaron Schulz is taking on a new role in
Wikimedia
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Brian Wolff bawo...@gmail.com wrote:
No you don't get more consistency by moving back to an experience
where you let the browser determine fonts. However you do get a
situation where things are more likely to work for non-latin scripts
(and other issues that
you guys are going to kick butt together! congrats! :)
On 7 Apr 2014 17:40, Rob Lanphier ro...@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone
I'm pleased to announce that Aaron Schulz is taking on a new role in
Wikimedia Foundation's Platform Team: Senior Performance Engineer.
Aaron works on MediaWiki
(anonymous) wrote:
This. Let's go back to what we *know* worked.
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/124387/ has already been merged, so
you're
/just/ late – unless you want to submit yet another patch reverting to
sans-
serif.
I would write said patch but I have no desire to get into
I am going to be annoying and answer your question with a question:
consensus among who? How do make a decision like this?
On the one hand, you have Wikimedia users, who don't really care about the
appearance of promoting FOSS or not.
[Citation needed]. User's aren't one person, but quite a
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_meetings/RFC_review_2014-04-09
This Wednesday, I'd like to get some quick is this RfC still
valid/what's the next step? checks on a few of our older RfCs. The list
I currently suggest we look at:
UserMailer refactor
Nonlinear versioning
On 4/7/14, Steven Walling steven.wall...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:46 PM, Brian Wolff bawo...@gmail.com wrote:
No you don't get more consistency by moving back to an experience
where you let the browser determine fonts. However you do get a
situation where things are more
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Brian Wolff bawo...@gmail.com wrote:
We can gain more consistent, accessible typography across languages
with an
iterative approach that continues to build on what we've done over the
last
five months. Or we can go back to the drawing board to try and
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 6:44 PM, Tim Landscheidt t...@tim-landscheidt.dewrote:
(anonymous) wrote:
This. Let's go back to what we *know* worked.
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/124387/ has already been merged, so
you're
/just/ late – unless you want to submit yet another patch
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:08 PM, Erwin Dokter er...@darcoury.nl wrote:
On 08-04-2014 00:45, Steven Walling wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Jon Robson jdlrob...@gmail.com wrote:
I noticed from Kaldari's notes [1] that Open sans was rejected based
on language support and install base.
Steven Walling wrote:
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 5:40 PM, MZMcBride z...@mzmcbride.com wrote:
* Is there an issue with specifying font-family: sans-serif; in
MediaWiki core?
Do you mean just for body type as Odder proposed in
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/124475/, or for everything?
That's
44 matches
Mail list logo
