https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30955

--- Comment #4 from Olivier Finlay Beaton <[email protected]> 2011-09-17 
22:43:54 UTC ---
I should have been more clear, I didn't mean that mediawiki should refuse to
run an extension that omitted the version number in the credits, this is
counter-productive asfar as backwards-compat is concerned.

Merely that the extension docs should say you should specify it and keep it up
to date (it doesn't even mention it). That Special:Version be changed to
highlight the version number so not having one is more glarring and obvious. 

I know in CVS people had auto-populated rev numbers in files, I don't have a
problem with extension authors using this.  We could add a 'revision' parameter
which is auto-populated with the 'stable' (or whatever you checked out)
revision number.  Then if your 'version' field is blank, it could use the
revision field instead.

The Extension infobox could state the trunk rev number for the extension if
it's in SVN.

This way we would support 'version' and 'revision', without necesarily forcing
people into SVN.

-- 
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