(For the record, the aforementioned comments bug has now been resolved, thanks to the efforts of Paladox and others.)
On Fri, Sep 2, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Mukunda Modell <mmod...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > The phame blogs are simply a convenient way to get phabricator related > announcements posted on the from page of phabricator. Actually other teams have already begun using them for other topics besides Phabricator-related announcements, see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/phame/blog/ . And more teams might follow. Which is a good reason to give the advantages and disadvantages of this new communication platform some more thought - before we get locked into it by accident and it might become another area where donor dollars have to be spent paying the upstream company to make sure Phabricator fulfills our needs (cf. below). > > The topics posted > their are also cross-posed to this list as the intended audience is mostly > the same. I can't find an equivalent of the following post in the archives of this list: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/phame/post/view/9/sponsored_phabricator_improvements/ . That's despite its topic having been the subject of extensive discussion on the list not long before the post was published: http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/710067 . (In any case, that was separate from the problem that Phame blogs didn't allow comments. Even if it had been true that all these announcements are cross-posted to this list, that would still not have helped someone who encountered them on Phabricator and did not have the insider knowledge that one can try to search the Wikitech list archives for a discussion of an announcement and sign up to the list for an opportunity to comment.) > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 4:37 AM, Quim Gil <q...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Tilman Bayer <tba...@wikimedia.org> > > wrote: > > > > > Apparently there hasn't been much discussion or deliberation about the > > > advantages and disadvantages of this new feature compared to other > > > communication channels. > > > > > > Excess of communication channels is a big problem in Wikimedia and a > > regular topic for complaints from new and experienced contributors > > (volunteers or paid, tech or non-tech). I think such discussion about > > advantages and disadvantages should happen before we invest too much > > content and attention in Phabricator blogs. > > +1. Back in 2014, before the launch of the Wikimedia Phabricator instance, the team did a great job in surveying needs and alternatives, reaching out to stakeholders, holding an RfC etc. Balkanization of communication venues was very much seen as a concern then. (For example, various teams at WMF were strongly encouraged to move their project management activities from Mingle, Trello etc. to Phabricator. Which is what happened.) The extension of Phabricator to some other areas since then (e.g. code review) has likewise been approached with a lot of diligence and inclusion. I'm not sure though this can said for all parts of the platform. -- Tilman Bayer Senior Analyst Wikimedia Foundation IRC (Freenode): HaeB _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
