On Thu, Oct 3, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Terry Chay <[email protected]> wrote:
> The requirement for extensions to be deployed has ALWAYS been that Features > Engineering sign off on a commitment to maintain the extension. I've > relaxed it > to be: "If another engineering department in collaboration with product is > willing to commit to it, Features will not block." I'd like to someday > relax > this further to: "If any engineering department or community development in > collaboration with the other core competencies (features, product, design, > and > community) are willing to commit to it, no one should block." We are not > there > yet, and trying to rail against that is winning a battle at the cost of > the war > breaking down these silos and having shared ownership and responsibility > in our > organization, in our community, and in our movement. > > I don't think this assertion is true, nor is the future it describes. We've been deploying extensions for a long time since before Features Engineering existed. Heck, I can think of a half dozen that we've deployed in the last year or so that Features didn't have anything to do with at all :) As long as someone's willing to maintain it, someone's willing to deploy it, it satisfies a technical need and/or has community consensus and most importantly has passed technical review then I'm always in favor of deploying extensions that people want to get live. It's incredibly encouraging especially to our volunteer devs to see the fruits of their labors actually being used :) -Chad _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
