https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47415

James Forrester <[email protected]> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |[email protected]

--- Comment #8 from James Forrester <[email protected]> ---
[Speaking with my "Product Manager for Admin Tools" hat on.]

(In reply to comment #5)
> I'm not sure what the point is of disabling auto patrol logging entirely.

The point is to save Wikidata from falling over because the DB can't scale.
(Note, BTW, that the proposal is only to disable autopatrol logging for
Wikidata, not other wikis; you can see the default setting for MW itself in the
commit.)

> That means patrolling tools will be unable to discover the log entry for
> a patrolled edit.

Indeed. We have lost a lot of MW core functionality over the years because of
our inability to design a system that can scale arbitrarily; this is not the
first, and sadly won't be the last.

> If "claim" should not be subject to auto-patrolling or patrolling, then that
> should be disabled instead.

The fault is not with Wikibase (which uses the entirely-reasonable concept of
letting wiki users edit things in the same way as on core MW), but with MW
core's design not being thought-through in terms of scalability. We already
know that the revisions table's growth is a problem; patrolling logs cause a
second table to also be a problem.

> Solving the "claim" auto patrol log problem, by disabling the logging for it
> entirely seems an odd way to solve the problem.

I appreciate that this is disruptive for users of the patrolling logs, most
notably the CVU tools, but this is a change made for site stability, and we
must accept it.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
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