adrianheine added a comment. In https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86528#973849, @Snaterlicious wrote:
> In my opinion, specifically developing for Wikidata would be opening > Pandora's box. We already have rather awkward Wikidata-specifics in the the > code (Calendar types reference Wikidata items, for example) and, from my > point of view, dealing with gadgets is already a critical aspect (we should, > for example, find a way to reflect the AuthorityControl gadget's > functionality in Wikibase core as soon as possible which, actually, points > into a similar direction). I am not sure whether every third party would like > to access Wikidata (or any web service at all) for running their Wikibase > installation and I remain advocating having an independent and flexible > stand-alone software. When configuring Wikidata, why should those > configuration options and the corresponding logic be separated from Wikibase? > That points into the direction of having a Wikidata release and a Wikibase > release, eventually. Just to be clear: I want to have Wikibase independent of Wikidata. I think my proposal is an improvement in that regard, since we could move Wikidata-specific code out of Wikibase into that Wikidata code base. For example, we would not have to implement AuthorityControl in WikibaseRepo, instead, we could Wikibase flexible enough to allow Wikidata to implement AuthorityControl in a sane way in PHP and JS. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86528 REPLY HANDLER ACTIONS Reply to comment or attach files, or !close, !claim, !unsubscribe or !assign <username>. EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: adrianheine Cc: Aklapper, daniel, JanZerebecki, adrianheine, Snaterlicious, thiemowmde, JeroenDeDauw, aude, Tobi_WMDE_SW, Stryn, Smalyshev, Wikidata-bugs _______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
