On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 3:34 AM, Daniel Kinzler <dan...@brightbyte.de> wrote: > You really want the spam filter extensions to have internal knowledge of > Wikibase? That seems like a nasty cross-dependency, and goes directly against > the idea of modularization and separation of concerns... > > We are running into the "glue code problem" here. We need code that knows > about > the spam filters and about wikibase. Should it be in the spam filter, in > Wikibase, or in a separate, third extension? That would be cleanest, but a > hassle to maintain... Which way would you prefer?
I think Daniel has correctly stated the problem. My perspective: One of the directions of the Admin Tools project is to combine some of the various tools into AbuseFilter, so I think it's safe to assume that AbuseFilter will be around and maintained for some time, and Wikidata could easily use the hooks it provides to do a lot of the work providing the interface. That being said, expanding AbuseFilter to work on non-article data has already been requested a few times, so I think we can make AbuseFilter much easier for Wikidata, and AFT to plug into. Maybe to start with, we can find out what functionality from AbuseFilter there is common between AFT and Wikibase, and try to build in most of the overlapping pieces into AbuseFilter. Then each can also use the AbuseFilter hooks to complete the functionality? _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
