--- Comment #10 from Tim Landscheidt <> ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Just mentioning that there are other needs for postgresql than just this, see
> #48896. Do you reckon 

Yes, but a) we don't need PostgreSQL for a wiki and b) that would probably be a
WONTFIX at WMF :-). is very plain and no frills, and there
are no problems migrating it to MySQL (or any other backend).

> I am rather wondering why the wiki should stay writeable, with wikitech being
> the new wiki for tools. Couldn't we just keep a read-only toolserver wiki as
> an
> archive (which is really good to have) and keep it in postgresql for
> simplicity?

> (If not, why?)

At some point in the future it should certainly be turned read-only.  But if we
migrate for example next month, people might want to add
information where specific tools went to, update links to their user pages,
etc.  I think it's easier if we keep it writeable for users with a
justification, rather than locking it totally up and having to handle every
change by an admin.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list

Reply via email to