https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=57659
--- Comment #9 from Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> --- (In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #7) > > Putting Flow out there on a couple of real discussion spaces > > is > > the only way we're going to be able to get actionable feedback on the design > > and UI side. The sooner we start receiving this kind of feedback, the sooner > > we > > can prioritize our work on all the outstanding bugs, enhancements and > > feature > > requests, so we get the right features to the right users at the right time. > > That sounds like the same reasoning they used when deploying VE to enwiki > with > known bugs unfixed. I think we all know how well *that* went. > > I realize the proposed deployment of Flow to enwiki is somewhat different > since > it's a deployment to two rather out-of-the-way talk pages rather than being > enabled by default for everyone. But on the other hand, it's also that much > less likely to give you the sort of feedback you're hoping for. And certain > vocal community members will be on the defensive given the recent VE > situation, > ready to blast "the WMF" for doing the "same" thing again. > Possibly. There are some community members who would find a way to take offence to "how is your day going?". I don't particularly think we should base our decisions around pandering to them. > > (In reply to comment #7) > > I understand that your priorities as a platform engineer fall toward making > > sure our API is robust and well-documented. > > I also want to avoid causing our volunteer community members to develop > towards > an API with known major flaws by pushing it on a production site before it's > ready. The test wikis and mediawiki.org, while in production, are still test > sites. -- 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
