On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 9:31 PM, Ori Livneh <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On the leadership front, let me throw out a hypothetical: should we >> have MediaWiki 2.0, where we start with an empty repository and build >> up? If so, who makes that decision? If not, what is our alternative >> vision? Who is going to define it? Is what we have good enough? > Let's throw out that hypothetical, because it's too grotesque even as a > conversation starter. And for the record, I agree with this. Full rewrites suck. > The model I do think we should consider is Python 3. Python 3 did not > jettison the Python 2 codebase. The intent behind the major version change > was to open up a parallel development track in which it was permissible to > break backward-compatibility in the name of making a substantial > contribution to the coherence, elegance and utility of the language. This is a more interesting model - especially if done in parallel with radical experiments creating new workspaces for content. Imagine 1) a version of MediaWiki where a lot of stuff is ripped out ruthlessly, and new features are added more quickly, 2) which powers a site which exists for creating, say, article drafts that can be imported into Wikipedia. That's the kind of thing I get very excited about. Erik -- Erik Möller VP of Product & Strategy, Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
