[15:05:00] [[Tech]]; AKlapper (WMF); /* Cite Function an edit window for Mon Wikipedia */; https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=24680192&oldid=24677088&rcid=26592521 [16:04:31] [[Tech]]; Htawmonzel; /* Cite Function an edit window for Mon Wikipedia */ Reply; https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=24680293&oldid=24680192&rcid=26592867 [16:17:18] [[Tech]]; AKlapper (WMF); /* Cite Function an edit window for Mon Wikipedia */; https://meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?diff=24680299&oldid=24680293&rcid=26593054 [16:37:22] Hi all! 17 individuals will mentor 9 projects via the upcoming rounds of Google Summer of Code and Outreachy. Details about the projects are here: [16:37:22] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code/2023, [16:37:23] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Outreachy/Round_26. If there any potential applicants looking for more information from you, please direct them to these pages. [17:00:03] slightly random question… can someone tell me if my cloak is set properly? [17:00:10] I’m confused by my current account status 😅 [17:00:54] Lucas_WMDE: I see a user/ cloak on you [17:01:23] I thought I’d gone through the procedure for some kind of Wikimedian cloak before [17:01:33] (don’t remember if I went for wikidata or mediawiki or another) [17:01:44] wmopbot cloakstatus also tells me I’m cloaked [17:02:09] do I need to do something to change from user to another cloak? [17:03:00] maybe you had an old cloak at freenode but did not get it transferred here [17:03:12] I'd just apply again [17:03:37] okay, I’ll try [17:03:38] thanks! [17:03:40] (unless the date is recent, in which case ask in -ops) [17:05:15] “cloak for Lucas_WMDE requested 1124 days ago (in freenode) is cloaked” [17:05:20] maybe it wasn’t carried over then [17:06:04] the “Submitting duplicates may cause your request to be rejected.” sentence made me slightly worried to submit another request ;) but I’ve sent it now, let’s see what happens :) [20:05:41] Is Extension:LiquidThreads enabled in production somewhere? (where?) [20:05:41] (WikiApiary is down now) [20:05:41] To me it seems huwiki has it [20:18:17] Valerioboz[m]: grepping in the operations/mediawiki-config repo, it looks like enwikinews, enwiktionary, huwiki, ptwikibooks, and svwikisource are still using the extension actively. There is another set of wikis (fiwikimedia, mediawikiwiki, officewiki, sewikimedia, strategywiki, testwiki, test2wiki, & wikimania2010wiki) where the extension is still installed, but is configured not to allow creating new talk pages. [20:23:10] LQT is on mediawiki.org (!). TIL [20:24:26] bawolff: only to keep the historic content around -- https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=&namespace=90&hideredirects=1 [20:25:08] apparently we never did actually turn LQT content back into normal talk pages (I thought I remembered that we did) [20:26:27] Well it did take us a really long time to kill Special:Code, so par for the course [20:27:26] properly getting rid of LQT and Flow would be a nice thing. Probably not something that any WMF team is excited to do, but it would be nice. [20:28:02] Really life-cycle concerns should have been thought about from the get-go, but oh well [20:28:56] somebody should start an RFC on enwiki ;) [20:29:46] On a serious note, we really should start replacing flow with DiscussionTools on mw.org. Especially for pages that aren't Project:Support_desk [20:30:08] Dealing with flow vandalism is such a pain in the ass [20:30:44] bawolff: T325907 [20:30:45] T325907: Disable Flow on new pages by default on MediaWiki.org - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T325907 [20:30:51] I don't know how anyone thought flow would succede when everything related to dealing with vandalism sucks, and the people who fight vandalism are the ones you need to get on board [20:30:52] I think it was already done? [20:31:43] I mean more, start actively converting existing talk pages away, not just the new ones [20:31:51] *nod* [20:32:21] I think I will boldly decline T107089 [20:32:22] T107089: Enable Flow sitewide on Mediawiki.org - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T107089 [20:32:45] bawolff: because it was "better" than what we had, but then like most other wmf projects, all its staffing got pulled [20:33:11] meh, it had years of being fully staffed [20:33:33] Flow had more than adequete resources and times to actually meet its usecases [20:34:28] yeah, it was more a victim of poor program management, arrogant design, and staffing with great coders who had never really hacked mediawiki before [20:34:47] My controversial opinion, is it didn't fully understand what it was trying to do, and like most software failed because it failed to understand the users use case [20:34:56] it invented too many new things in pursuit of bad requirements [20:35:17] Also i suspect changing requirements depending on political winds [20:35:50] Like i remember listening to jorm's vision at the beginning of the flow journey. It was almost 100% different from what ended up happening [20:36:27] Well i don't know, some of the early design decisions were a bit batshit [20:36:57] Like the whole "We really like NoSQL, but we are required to use MySQL, so instead we are going to implement a nosql type system over top of mysql" [20:36:59] I remember finding the pitch docs for Flow when I was interviewing and telling Erik that it was the worst idea I had read about in an interview... [20:37:37] back when the pitch was a universal workflow management tool [20:38:00] I will die on the hill that reimplementing a nosql design on top of a relational database is a terrible technical design decision [20:38:23] although i think they got rid of 80% of that decision at this point [20:40:17] Ironically, one of the bigger problems with flow is it was really bad with workflows, and workflows make up a significant part of the usecase for talk pages [21:03:44] Anyways, https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki-extensions-Flow/blob/e2bf374ba0881283c8404981a173f8079c520388/DATA_ABSTRACTION is the thing I always thought was a terrible technical design decision (albeit i think they reversed course on it)