Jon, here's what I posted last week. It's possible that you missed it because I didn't post it as a reply to you...
The Flow team is going to work in a few weeks on automatically archiving talk pages, so that we can enable Flow on pages where there are already existing conversations. Basically, this means moving the old discussions on an archive page, and leaving a link for "See archived talk page" visible on the new Flow board. That means there'll be a minute where a currently active discussion would get interrupted, and have to be restarted on the new Flow board. That will be a pain, but it would only be a one-time inconvenience during that transition moment. The team's goal for LiquidThreads transition is essentially the same -- turning the existing conversations into a form that we can archive, and preserve for the future. If we tried to turn ongoing LQT discussions into ongoing Flow discussions, we'd actually be spending more development time on archiving the deprecated feature than we would spend on archiving wiki talk pages. There's a few more big features for Flow that we're working on this summer; we'll have some new things to show off pretty soon. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 9:21 AM, James Forrester <jforres...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > On 10 June 2014 09:19, Brian Wolff <bawo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Jun 10, 2014 1:10 PM, "Jon Robson" <jdlrob...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > The other mail seems to have gone on a huge tangent about the benefits > > > of Flow / what it can do. This is great but I feel like my original > > > question has gone unanswered so I am resurrecting it with a new e-mail > > > subject. I worry lots of good feedback got lost in that big email > > > chain. > > > > > > So hypothetically... If we switched over from the unmaintained > > > LiquidThreads (LQT) to the maintained Flow what would happen? [By this > > > I mean on every page regardless of namespace that LQT is we enable > > > Flow instead.] > > > > > > Some top level questions to get started: > > > 1) Do we need to import all conversations over OR can we just switch > > > to a blank page to get started from? > > > 2) What can you do in LQT that you cannot do in Flow? (Please do not > > > include issues with design - this is a new product that can be > > > redefined as it is developed on) > > > 3) Any other concerns? > > > > > > You are talking about mw.org? I think non mediawiki.org wikis requires a > > longer discussion. Id suggest just doing mw.org for the time being. > > > > I disagree. Instead, I would suggest having just the smidgen of patience > and actually waiting when the Flow team have responded on the thread and > told you it'd take some time, rather than posting the same request in a > second thread because you didn't get the answer you wanted. > > J. > -- > James D. Forrester > Product Manager, VisualEditor > Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. > > jforres...@wikimedia.org | @jdforrester > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
