"If people don't want to put their code through review this is scary to me"
They do get their code reviewed. The rules are however usually simple 'it needs to work'. Not everyone has time to spend a gazillion hours on getting familiar with git, gerrit, jshint, git-review, resourceloader, i18n, l10n, the actual review lag, the deploy lag and I don't know what else. Some ppl just want to edit categories super fast NOW. That's how these tools start and then these people are usually done. A bit of required maintenance, but that's it, they are editing/reviewing/categorizing again. Look at navpopups. With minor changes, that thing has been able to run basically unsupervised since 2006 and it is one of the most popular tools. So people want to make extensions out of JS code, just do it, but some people don't and you should respect that. To get what you want, you need: 1: Flagged revisions/review for .css/.js wikipages 2: CSS/JS editor for wikipage with JSHint integrated etc integrated 3: i18n support for gadgets. 4: Global repositories for gadgets 5: Integrated versioning and updating for 'installed' scripts 6: Autogenerated documentation Then ppl will come flocking. DJ On 18 jul. 2013, at 00:08, Jon Robson <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd really like to see a review process where Gadgets move from Gadget > status to core. To me a Gadget is a great way to explore a new type of > functionality and prove it's worth but it comes with a cost - it's > very difficult to ensure a Gadget doesn't breaking with core changes > or with the installation of some other extension/gadget. I can imagine > this would also be the developer equivalent of a barn star - such a > promotion I'd hope would be very flattering to authors and would > encourage Gadget writing and innovation. Likewise if a gadget is not > being used we should not leave it install on a wiki. > > If people don't want to put their code through review this is scary to > me - surely the standards of any code we put out to users should be of > the highest quality..? We should not be scared of code review and see > it as a positive thing that builds our knowledge up and makes us be > the best we possibly can. If this is seen as a bad thing we really > need to ask ourselves questions about the review process. > > If people are scared of using Gerrit/Git we should create nicer > interfaces into it.. no? > > (Note for those not familiar with what HotCat is: > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:HotCat) > > On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Yuvi Panda <[email protected]> wrote: >> It's universally liked, is there almost on every wiki, and provides a >> much needed functionality. Why isn't this deployed as an extension, or >> better yet - part of core, than as a gadget? Just a matter of someone >> to do the work? >> >> -- >> Yuvi Panda T >> http://yuvi.in/blog >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikitech-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > > > > -- > Jon Robson > http://jonrobson.me.uk > @rakugojon > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
