https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16026





--- Comment #5 from Happy-melon <[email protected]>  2009-01-01 
11:24:34 UTC ---
How is introducing a new message any less disruptive than updating the old one?
If the site hasn't customised the message, it updates silently to the new
default in either implementation.  If they *have* customised the message, then
you suggest that their text should myseriously revert back to the default
version for no reason that they can immediately discern, rather than
myseriously convert to wikimarkup... I know which one I'd find easier to fix. 
There's no way to have backwards-compatibility here without keeping *both*
messages running simultaneously, which is completely barking.  It's not like it
renders the wiki unusable; it means some sites will show a few <a> tags until
their admins fix the messages, and it should be obvious what needs to be done
even without reading the release notes.  With a new message, people will have
to dig around certainly through the release notes, possibly even through the
code, to find where their custom message has gone.  That sounds more disruptive
than just updating it to me. 


-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to