Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Wikitech

MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia wikitech RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


mah at everybody

Jun 6, 2012, 10:36 AM

Post #1 of 39 (473 views)
Permalink
MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF

In the past couple of weeks I've been talking with Sam Reed (WMF's
current MediaWiki release manager) and Rob Laphiner (WMF's Platform
Engineering Director) about the future of MediaWiki tarballs.

I began this discussion after Rob expressed regret about the WMF's
ability to give tarball distribution the attention it deserves. Since
the WMF is focused on maintaining Wikipedia and its sister projects,
tarball distribution often loses among competing priorities.

The Foundation has made MediaWiki available for everyone and that's a
great thing. But Wikimedia's funding comes from donations as a result
of requests on Wikipedia, not from distribution of MediaWiki, so they
are rightly focused on their production cluster.

Other users of the MediaWiki software have different needs. For
instance, Citizendium, and Wikia and have both pegged their MediaWiki
installations at 1.16.5 for stability and made their own modifications
-- essentially forking the code. Forking is not ideal, but it is
understandable because there is no cooperation around individual
MediaWiki releases over the long term. With a third party to manage
MediaWiki releases and maintain long term support for selected releases,
cooperation between non-WMF users would be smoother.

To this start effort, I welcome interested collaborators from the
community of MediaWiki users outside of the WMF. With your help, we
will start making and maintaining MediaWiki releases based on the core
MediaWiki code without forking development.

I've been discussing this with some MediaWiki sites as well as setting
up a separate mailing list for packagers (such as Debian and RedHat
distributors) and discussing it there. So far the response has been
positive.

So now I'm asking you guys. Any interest?

--
http://hexmode.com/

Find peace within yourself and there will be peace on heaven and
earth. -- Abba Isaac

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


dgerard at gmail

Jun 6, 2012, 10:48 AM

Post #2 of 39 (468 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 6 June 2012 18:36, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:

> I've been discussing this with some MediaWiki sites as well as setting
> up a separate mailing list for packagers (such as Debian and RedHat
> distributors) and discussing it there.  So far the response has been
> positive.


Speaking as a tarball consumer, with a great interest in the future of
tarballs (though I'm unlikely to be knowledgeable enough to package
them) - is there any reason this list should be separate from
mediawiki-l? At least it should be announced there.


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


glaser at hallowelt

Jun 6, 2012, 10:49 AM

Post #3 of 39 (466 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

Definitely interested! I have just finished some packaging for the Web App Gallery and would like to see (and add) some more flexibility to the installer. Also, at SF Hackathon, we had some discussion about the use of MediaWiki by outside parties, their issues and how to make their lives easier ;)

Cheers, Markus

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: wikitech-l-bounces [at] lists [mailto:wikitech-l-bounces [at] lists] Im Auftrag von Mark A. Hershberger
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 6. Juni 2012 19:36
An: developers, Wikimedia
Betreff: [Wikitech-l] MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF

In the past couple of weeks I've been talking with Sam Reed (WMF's current MediaWiki release manager) and Rob Laphiner (WMF's Platform Engineering Director) about the future of MediaWiki tarballs.

I began this discussion after Rob expressed regret about the WMF's ability to give tarball distribution the attention it deserves. Since the WMF is focused on maintaining Wikipedia and its sister projects, tarball distribution often loses among competing priorities.

The Foundation has made MediaWiki available for everyone and that's a great thing. But Wikimedia's funding comes from donations as a result of requests on Wikipedia, not from distribution of MediaWiki, so they are rightly focused on their production cluster.

Other users of the MediaWiki software have different needs. For instance, Citizendium, and Wikia and have both pegged their MediaWiki installations at 1.16.5 for stability and made their own modifications
-- essentially forking the code. Forking is not ideal, but it is understandable because there is no cooperation around individual MediaWiki releases over the long term. With a third party to manage MediaWiki releases and maintain long term support for selected releases, cooperation between non-WMF users would be smoother.

To this start effort, I welcome interested collaborators from the community of MediaWiki users outside of the WMF. With your help, we will start making and maintaining MediaWiki releases based on the core MediaWiki code without forking development.

I've been discussing this with some MediaWiki sites as well as setting up a separate mailing list for packagers (such as Debian and RedHat
distributors) and discussing it there. So far the response has been positive.

So now I'm asking you guys. Any interest?

--
http://hexmode.com/

Find peace within yourself and there will be peace on heaven and
earth. -- Abba Isaac

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


datzrott at alizeepathology

Jun 6, 2012, 10:53 AM

Post #4 of 39 (466 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

>Definitely interested! I have just finished some packaging for the Web App
Gallery
>and would like to see (and add) some more flexibility to the installer.
Also, at SF
>Hackathon, we had some discussion about the use of MediaWiki by outside
>parties, their issues and how to make their lives easier ;)

What did your discussions conclude?

Also I agree that this is a marvellous idea. I personally am unable to
help, but it has my support 100%.

Thank you,
Derric Atzrott


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


krenair at gmail

Jun 6, 2012, 11:00 AM

Post #5 of 39 (466 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

Just to clarify, as it's not particularly clear to me - you're looking for people willing to test, package and release MediaWiki?
If so, I'd be happy to learn how.

On 06/06/12 18:36, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:

> In the past couple of weeks I've been talking with Sam Reed (WMF's
> current MediaWiki release manager) and Rob Laphiner (WMF's Platform
> Engineering Director) about the future of MediaWiki tarballs.
>
> I began this discussion after Rob expressed regret about the WMF's
> ability to give tarball distribution the attention it deserves. Since
> the WMF is focused on maintaining Wikipedia and its sister projects,
> tarball distribution often loses among competing priorities.
>
> The Foundation has made MediaWiki available for everyone and that's a
> great thing. But Wikimedia's funding comes from donations as a result
> of requests on Wikipedia, not from distribution of MediaWiki, so they
> are rightly focused on their production cluster.
>
> Other users of the MediaWiki software have different needs. For
> instance, Citizendium, and Wikia and have both pegged their MediaWiki
> installations at 1.16.5 for stability and made their own modifications
> -- essentially forking the code. Forking is not ideal, but it is
> understandable because there is no cooperation around individual
> MediaWiki releases over the long term. With a third party to manage
> MediaWiki releases and maintain long term support for selected releases,
> cooperation between non-WMF users would be smoother.
>
> To this start effort, I welcome interested collaborators from the
> community of MediaWiki users outside of the WMF. With your help, we
> will start making and maintaining MediaWiki releases based on the core
> MediaWiki code without forking development.
>
> I've been discussing this with some MediaWiki sites as well as setting
> up a separate mailing list for packagers (such as Debian and RedHat
> distributors) and discussing it there. So far the response has been
> positive.
>
> So now I'm asking you guys. Any interest?
>


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Jun 6, 2012, 11:12 AM

Post #6 of 39 (467 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 06/06/2012 01:48 PM, David Gerard wrote:

> is there any reason this list should be separate from
> mediawiki-l? At least it should be announced there.

Done.


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Jun 6, 2012, 11:20 AM

Post #7 of 39 (468 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 06/06/2012 02:00 PM, Krenair wrote:
> Just to clarify, as it's not particularly clear to me - you're looking
> for people willing to test, package and release MediaWiki?
> If so, I'd be happy to learn how.

Yes. I am willing to take on the tarball maintenance if needed, but if
you are willing and able, I'll work with you to make sure we have a
working tarball creation and release process from Sam Reed.

But beyond that, we will need testers.

Speaking of testing, if anyone wants to help make sure the 1.19 release
of MediaWiki included in the next Debian package (and probably the next
Ubuntu package) is working, now is the time to test. Debian will soon
freeze their packages for their upcoming stable release.

http://packages.debian.org/experimental/mediawiki

--
http://hexmode.com/

Find peace within yourself and there will be peace on heaven and
earth. -- Abba Isaac

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


dgerard at gmail

Jun 6, 2012, 11:25 AM

Post #8 of 39 (468 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 6 June 2012 19:20, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:

> Speaking of testing, if anyone wants to help make sure the 1.19 release
> of MediaWiki included in the next Debian package (and probably the next
> Ubuntu package) is working, now is the time to test.  Debian will soon
> freeze their packages for their upcoming stable release.
> http://packages.debian.org/experimental/mediawiki


Last I recalled, the Debian MediaWiki was regarded as a pit of
gratuitous weirdness of sufficient extent that it was all but
deprecated, and any sane admin installs from the tarball. Is this
still the state of play, and if not then what improved?


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


innocentkiller at gmail

Jun 6, 2012, 11:29 AM

Post #9 of 39 (466 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 2:25 PM, David Gerard <dgerard [at] gmail> wrote:
> On 6 June 2012 19:20, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:
>
>> Speaking of testing, if anyone wants to help make sure the 1.19 release
>> of MediaWiki included in the next Debian package (and probably the next
>> Ubuntu package) is working, now is the time to test.  Debian will soon
>> freeze their packages for their upcoming stable release.
>> http://packages.debian.org/experimental/mediawiki
>
>
> Last I recalled, the Debian MediaWiki was regarded as a pit of
> gratuitous weirdness of sufficient extent that it was all but
> deprecated, and any sane admin installs from the tarball. Is this
> still the state of play, and if not then what improved?
>

Well since we introduced a CLI installer, it should make the process
much cleaner for people packaging the wiki. I don't know what work
has been done (if any), but the groundwork's been laid on our end.

The other big complaint we've had over time is moving stuff around
to the typical Debian-esque locations (eg: putting LocalSettings in
/etc). Don't know what the status is on that though.

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Jun 6, 2012, 11:31 AM

Post #10 of 39 (467 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 06/06/2012 02:25 PM, David Gerard wrote:

> Last I recalled, the Debian MediaWiki was regarded as a pit of
> gratuitous weirdness of sufficient extent that it was all but
> deprecated, and any sane admin installs from the tarball. Is this
> still the state of play, and if not then what improved?

I've heard this many times and, as a result, I have not tried the Debian
Package. However, many people use their system's package.

I don't know about you, but *I* don't want an awful Debian package to be
people's first experience with MediaWiki. We can improve this situation
and now is the perfect time to do that.

Mark.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Jun 6, 2012, 11:39 AM

Post #11 of 39 (466 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 06/06/2012 02:29 PM, Chad wrote:
> Well since we introduced a CLI installer ...

Side note: we re-introduced the CLI installer. I discovered this while
tracking down ancient MediaWikis last week, an ancient version of MW
(1.2?) used a command line install method.

I'm sure the current one is much better, though.

Mark.


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


dgerard at gmail

Jun 6, 2012, 11:44 AM

Post #12 of 39 (466 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 6 June 2012 19:31, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:
> On 06/06/2012 02:25 PM, David Gerard wrote:

>> Last I recalled, the Debian MediaWiki was regarded as a pit of
>> gratuitous weirdness of sufficient extent that it was all but
>> deprecated, and any sane admin installs from the tarball. Is this
>> still the state of play, and if not then what improved?

> I've heard this many times and, as a result, I have not tried the Debian
> Package.  However, many people use their system's package.
> I don't know about you, but *I* don't want an awful Debian package to be
> people's first experience with MediaWiki.  We can improve this situation
> and now is the perfect time to do that.


I'd *like* their package to be suitable. We use Ubuntu 10.04 at work,
and 14.04 or the corresponding Debian as of late 2014 are the hot
prospects for next refresh. So for me testing the Debian version
depends on how well the lone debs install on what's effectively an old
version ...


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


innocentkiller at gmail

Jun 6, 2012, 11:46 AM

Post #13 of 39 (466 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:
> On 06/06/2012 02:29 PM, Chad wrote:
>> Well since we introduced a CLI installer ...
>
> Side note: we re-introduced the CLI installer.  I discovered this while
> tracking down ancient MediaWikis last week, an ancient version of MW
> (1.2?) used a command line install method.
>
> I'm sure the current one is much better, though.
>

Still needs some work, but yeah, it's better ;-)

-Chad

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


Platonides at gmail

Jun 6, 2012, 1:55 PM

Post #14 of 39 (466 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 06/06/12 20:29, Chad wrote:
> Well since we introduced a CLI installer, it should make the process
> much cleaner for people packaging the wiki. I don't know what work
> has been done (if any), but the groundwork's been laid on our end.
>
> The other big complaint we've had over time is moving stuff around
> to the typical Debian-esque locations (eg: putting LocalSettings in
> /etc). Don't know what the status is on that though.
>
> -Chad

The problem in the past was primarily lack of cooperation from the
packagers. I remember years ago that Aryeh offered help in some bug
trackers (with little/no response).

I'd happily add hooks they needed to remove the need of patching for
MediaWiki packagers, or including a script to move if that's what they
really want.

Also, it'd be cool if downstream maintainers, that are keeping security
patches for old versions, did it in MediaWiki repo.
* Cross-distro work. No need to independently patch or copy the patches
from other distros.
* Just one repository, no need of stacked patch queues.
* Availability in the upstream official repo.
* Easy for us to review/fix in case we spotted something there.
* We could commit the fixes for the externally-lts-maintained branched
at near-0 cost when backporting some fixes.

Cons:
* They need to request a gerrit account.
* Yet another website for them to use.
?


IMHO that's a win-win.


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Jun 6, 2012, 3:53 PM

Post #15 of 39 (450 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 06/06/2012 04:55 PM, Platonides wrote:
> The problem in the past was primarily lack of cooperation from the
> packagers. I remember years ago that Aryeh offered help in some bug
> trackers (with little/no response).

To encourage cooperation, I started the low-traffic
mediawiki-distributors last week. I also asked Debian to work on
packaging 1.19 instead of 1.18 for their impending freeze and have been
working with them on their pkg-mediawiki-devel mailing list to do sane
things with packaging.

For example, today they were thinking about dropping wikidiff2 and (with
Chad's input) I pointed out some problems with this. So, someone has
stepped up to take on the work.

> I'd happily add hooks they needed to remove the need of patching for
> MediaWiki packagers, or including a script to move if that's what they
> really want.

Packaging is happening right now. Look at the patches they're making
here:
http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-mediawiki/mediawiki/trunk/debian/patches/

> Also, it'd be cool if downstream maintainers, that are keeping security
> patches for old versions, did it in MediaWiki repo.

Absolutely. This is one of the main reasons that I want to tag 1.19 as
a LTS version -- so we can continue to do our work in Gerrit without a
problem.

> * Cross-distro work. No need to independently patch or copy the patches
> from other distros.
> * Just one repository, no need of stacked patch queues.
> * Availability in the upstream official repo.
> * Easy for us to review/fix in case we spotted something there.
> * We could commit the fixes for the externally-lts-maintained branched
> at near-0 cost when backporting some fixes.

You read my mind!

Mark.


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


glaser at hallowelt

Jun 6, 2012, 4:07 PM

Post #16 of 39 (449 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

>>Also, at SF
>>Hackathon, we had some discussion about the use of MediaWiki by outside
>>parties, their issues and how to make their lives easier ;)

> What did your discussions conclude?


Actually, it was even earlier...;) Discussion notes can be found at http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/NOLA_Hackathon/Saturday#Third-party_committers_help

Cheers,
Markus

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


dgerard at gmail

Jun 6, 2012, 4:08 PM

Post #17 of 39 (451 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 6 June 2012 23:53, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:

> To encourage cooperation, I started the low-traffic
> mediawiki-distributors last week.  I also asked Debian to work on
> packaging 1.19 instead of 1.18 for their impending freeze and have been
> working with them on their pkg-mediawiki-devel mailing list to do sane
> things with packaging.
> For example, today they were thinking about dropping wikidiff2 and (with
> Chad's input) I pointed out some problems with this.  So, someone has
> stepped up to take on the work.


This is most promising!


> Absolutely.  This is one of the main reasons that I want to tag 1.19 as
> a LTS version -- so we can continue to do our work in Gerrit without a
> problem.


Oooh. How long do you roughly guess this means?


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


jeremy at tuxmachine

Jun 6, 2012, 4:19 PM

Post #18 of 39 (450 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 7:08 PM, David Gerard <dgerard [at] gmail> wrote:
> On 6 June 2012 23:53, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:
>> Absolutely.  This is one of the main reasons that I want to tag 1.19 as
>> a LTS version -- so we can continue to do our work in Gerrit without a
>> problem.
>
> Oooh. How long do you roughly guess this means?

3-4 years.

-Jeremy

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


dgerard at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 7:26 AM

Post #19 of 39 (447 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 6 June 2012 23:53, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:

By the way, I noticed today that this page exists and is in sore need
of updating:

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Running_MediaWiki_on_Debian_GNU/Linux


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


innocentkiller at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 8:26 AM

Post #20 of 39 (449 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

We should kill those distro-specific pages and I've been saying that for
years. Most of the advice ends up being rather generic, it forks the
content, and they generally end up being abandoned and out of date.

-Chad
On Jun 7, 2012 10:26 AM, "David Gerard" <dgerard [at] gmail> wrote:

> On 6 June 2012 23:53, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:
>
> By the way, I noticed today that this page exists and is in sore need
> of updating:
>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Running_MediaWiki_on_Debian_GNU/Linux
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> Wikitech-l [at] lists
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


dgerard at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 9:55 AM

Post #21 of 39 (449 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 7 June 2012 16:26, Chad <innocentkiller [at] gmail> wrote:

> We should kill those distro-specific pages and I've been saying that for
> years. Most of the advice ends up being rather generic, it forks the
> content, and they generally end up being abandoned and out of date.


*Not while they need to exist*. At the least, we need to document when
a distro does something weirdarse. And this particularly applies to
Debian, which does a pile of weirdarse things, to fit in with the
weirdarse things they do with Apache. (Which the distro-specific page
also needs to list.)

This will increase the probability that people like me will actually
use the distro version rather than finding it a weird unsupported
fork.

Of course, this requires a list of weird things Debian does. Is there
such a list? (I see the MediaWiki page on the Debian wiki is proposed
for deletion ...)

I'll start hacking that page to bits, on the assumption that it needs
burning and starting over. What is Debian's mailing list for
MediaWiki? I went looking for it and couldn't find it ...


- d.


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


mah at everybody

Jun 7, 2012, 10:07 AM

Post #22 of 39 (450 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 06/07/2012 12:55 PM, David Gerard wrote:
> I'll start hacking that page to bits, on the assumption that it needs
> burning and starting over. What is Debian's mailing list for
> MediaWiki? I went looking for it and couldn't find it ...

http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mediawiki-devel/

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


dgerard at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 10:40 AM

Post #23 of 39 (449 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 7 June 2012 18:07, Mark A. Hershberger <mah [at] everybody> wrote:
> On 06/07/2012 12:55 PM, David Gerard wrote:

>> I'll start hacking that page to bits, on the assumption that it needs
>> burning and starting over. What is Debian's mailing list for
>> MediaWiki? I went looking for it and couldn't find it ...

> http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-mediawiki-devel/


kewl :-) Quick page here, with no pretensions to being a manual page.
Links to the existing pages, all of which are indeed obsolete. I'll
add to this as I go.

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Debian/Ubuntu


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


Platonides at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 10:45 AM

Post #24 of 39 (447 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On 07/06/12 00:53, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
>> I'd happily add hooks they needed to remove the need of patching for
>> MediaWiki packagers, or including a script to move if that's what they
>> really want.
>
> Packaging is happening right now. Look at the patches they're making
> here:
> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-mediawiki/mediawiki/trunk/debian/patches/

A supported release shouldn't need any patching...

Let's look at them:

> series 319 2 days jmw Don't use fix_invalid_sql_2.patch after all, it appears to be fixed upstream
Good :)
(although 'it appears to be fixed' sadly means that it wasn't linked to
a bug number in our tracker, from which it can be confirmed)


== fix_invalid_sql.patch ==
It is converting an INSERT IGNORE into an insert, following a bug report
at
https://evolvis.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1377&group_id=39&atid=378
then moved to http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=615983

I haven't found it on our bugtracker.

Not explicity said on the bug report, the backtrace reveals it is
happening with PostgreSQL backend.

DatabasePostgres::insert() contains code to deal with INSERT IGNORE
since d5b71 (July 2008), and it seems to have been doing something even
before. But it was missing in the insertSelect wrapper.
That's bug 18909. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18909
which got fixed in r58179 (October 2009) and got into 1.16.

The backtrace in the 2011 bug does show that their DatabasePostgres
wrapper didn't contain insertSelect() method (confirmed by reporting the
bug against 1.15.3).



== mimetypes.patch ==
Changes $wgMimeTypeFile from "includes/mime.types"; to
"/etc/mime.types", fair one.

== suppress_warnings.patch ==
Changes session_start(); to @session_start(); inside a pair of
wfSuppressWarnings() wfSuppressWarnings(). WRONG.
The patch is not needed.

Moreover, it was an @session_start() until Tim changed it to
wfSuppressWarnings() in fbfb50 (March 2008).
Previosuly it had been changed from session_start() to @session_start()
by Gabriel Wicke in 90aadf7 (April 2004).

So this patch has been unneeded at least for 8 years :)
(svn history suggests that it was created in 2010, not knowing that
wfSuppressWarnings actually deals with php warnings)

== texvc_location.patch ==
Adds $wgTexvc = '/usr/bin/texvc'; to DefaultSettings.php (plus a comment).

Useless change. That's not enough to make <math> work. The math tag was
been splitted to a separate extension in 1.18. So the user would *also*
need to include the math extension in LocalSettings. That line should go
in the extension package, not in MediaWiki DefaultSettings.php



= Summary =
Out of 4 patches, only 1 seems to be 'useful'.

Even that, it could be moved to a different file instead of a core hack.
Are they using something like a /etc/mediawiki.d/ folder?


So yes, I'm happy we are improving collaboration packagers <-> upstream.

Regards


_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


innocentkiller at gmail

Jun 7, 2012, 10:55 AM

Post #25 of 39 (448 views)
Permalink
Re: MediaWiki tarballs and the WMF [In reply to]

On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Platonides <Platonides [at] gmail> wrote:
> On 07/06/12 00:53, Mark A. Hershberger wrote:
>>> I'd happily add hooks they needed to remove the need of patching for
>>> MediaWiki packagers, or including a script to move if that's what they
>>> really want.
>>
>> Packaging is happening right now.  Look at the patches they're making
>> here:
>> http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/pkg-mediawiki/mediawiki/trunk/debian/patches/
>
> A supported release shouldn't need any patching...
>
> Let's look at them:
>
>> series         319     2 days          jmw     Don't use fix_invalid_sql_2.patch after all, it appears to be fixed upstream
> Good :)
> (although 'it appears to be fixed' sadly means that it wasn't linked to
> a bug number in our tracker, from which it can be confirmed)
>
>
> == fix_invalid_sql.patch ==
> It is converting an INSERT IGNORE into an insert, following a bug report
> at
> https://evolvis.org/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1377&group_id=39&atid=378
> then moved to http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=615983
>
> I haven't found it on our bugtracker.
>
> Not explicity said on the bug report, the backtrace reveals it is
> happening with PostgreSQL backend.
>
> DatabasePostgres::insert() contains code to deal with INSERT IGNORE
> since d5b71 (July 2008), and it seems to have been doing something even
> before. But it was missing in the insertSelect wrapper.
> That's bug 18909. https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=18909
> which got fixed in r58179 (October 2009) and got into 1.16.
>
> The backtrace in the 2011 bug does show that their DatabasePostgres
> wrapper didn't contain insertSelect() method (confirmed by reporting the
> bug against 1.15.3).
>
>
>
> == mimetypes.patch ==
> Changes $wgMimeTypeFile from "includes/mime.types"; to
> "/etc/mime.types", fair one.
>
> == suppress_warnings.patch ==
> Changes session_start(); to @session_start(); inside a pair of
> wfSuppressWarnings() wfSuppressWarnings(). WRONG.
> The patch is not needed.
>
> Moreover, it was an @session_start() until Tim changed it to
> wfSuppressWarnings() in fbfb50 (March 2008).
> Previosuly it had been changed from session_start() to @session_start()
> by Gabriel Wicke in 90aadf7 (April 2004).
>
> So this patch has been unneeded at least for 8 years :)
> (svn history suggests that it was created in 2010, not knowing that
> wfSuppressWarnings actually deals with php warnings)
>
> == texvc_location.patch ==
> Adds $wgTexvc = '/usr/bin/texvc'; to DefaultSettings.php (plus a comment).
>
> Useless change. That's not enough to make <math> work. The math tag was
> been splitted to a separate extension in 1.18. So the user would *also*
> need to include the math extension in LocalSettings. That line should go
> in the extension package, not in MediaWiki DefaultSettings.php
>
>
>
> = Summary =
> Out of 4 patches, only 1 seems to be 'useful'.
>
> Even that, it could be moved to a different file instead of a core hack.
> Are they using something like a /etc/mediawiki.d/ folder?
>
>
> So yes, I'm happy we are improving collaboration packagers <-> upstream.
>

Looking at the Ubuntu package[0], there's a *bunch* of other patches
Have these all been upstreamed (some obviously have, and some are
backports)

-Chad


[0] http://packages.ubuntu.com/quantal/web/mediawiki

_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia wikitech RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.