On 2015-11-03, S Page <sp...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > I noticed two conventions for the extension of wikitext files in git: > .mediawiki and .wiki, e.g. tests/browser/README.mediawiki and > extensions/Wikibase/docs/lua.wiki. GitHub will render both kinds as > MediaWiki wikitext (of course it only implements a subset); it seems > Phabricator doesn't recognize either extension. I think we should be > consistent. .mediawiki is more precise (it's not MoinMoin or IkeWiki > markup) while .wiki is shorter. Maybe there are other arguments for one > extension over the other.
If both "README" and "README.mediawiki" were present I'd tend to think that this is some imported piece of software and README is the upstream README file and README.mediawiki contains MW-specific bits (like import/upstreaming instructions, whatever). Something we might start to see in vendor/ eventually. I avoid extensions for text files without source code at all, but maybe because I don't use Windows a lot. Somehow funny we cannot use our own markup where we need to :) Saper _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
