--- Comment #19 from Bawolff (Brian Wolff) <> ---

>   I can create them with the "Test images" label and I would assume they
> would
> be ignored. Also, keep in mind that theses tests are not supposed to be run
> as
> frequently as unit tests. These tests only make sense to be run agains a new
> deployment candidate. Anyways, let's start running them and if there are any
> issues, I am sure we can address them.

Personally I would suggest asking permission instead of begging forgiveness in
situations such as these.


>I guess the main issue is that it will show up in the various change lists
>(less often if you use get a bot flag for the test user). Having many revisions
>might be a problem as well (for articles it used to be; the English Wikipedia
>was borked several times by someone trying to delete a page with a long
>history), but that should not be hard to prevent, as long as we do not forget
>about it.

There are indeed scaling issues with deleting (or moving) an image with a large
number of old versions (Which probably come a lot sooner than the 100000
revisions or whatever it was for WP:sandbox). My suggestion would be just not
to delete it. There would hopefully not be scaling issues with just uploading a
lot of new versions, and if there are its something that should be a high
priority to resolve as we do have examples of regularly updated images on
commons that will have large numbers of old versions (At the very least in the
hundreds range).

[Slightly off topic]
Could be interesting to have an icingna type check that runs say every 20
minutes which uploads a small file to upload stash on commons (bonus points for
also doing chunked in addition to normal), then downloads it from the upload
stash, verifying it is the same file. This would leave no footprints in the
wiki, and catch a good portion of the things that can go wrong with the upload

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

Reply via email to