On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 4:28 PM, Brian <brian.min...@colorado.edu> wrote: > I definitely think it's a good idea to go after the low hanging fruit first, > which it sounds like is what they are doing with this 800k. Fixing the core > of the problem is definitely not low hanging fruit - it's hard work. On the > other hand, the foundation just got a couple million in unrestricted funds, > and when I say that they can start fixing the problem at any time, I mean > they can seek out an additional grant if necessary for this specific issue. > Basically what I am saying is that I don't jive with the perspective that we > should accept wikitext as it is and hack in new "fixes" on top of it. I > would like to see the foundation go out and try to fix this problem the > correct way, starting nowish.
They could do that. I wouldn't be surprised if they start serious WYSIWYG work in a year or two. But there are a *lot* of things on Wikipedia that could be improved. Even with the big grants Wikimedia's now getting, it operates on a budget less than 0.1% that of some comparably large websites (like Google). Right now I hope we're going to focus on getting more full-time experienced programmers, like hiring a CTO and letting Brion become only senior software architect. We have lots of junior people doing work, but code review is still a huge bottleneck AFAICT. Just look at the current discussion on JS2, for instance, or the outages caused by performance problems that weren't caught before deployment. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
