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

Mailing List Archive: Wikipedia: Wikitech

Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org

 

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All Wikipedia wikitech RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


tstarling at wikimedia

Aug 21, 2012, 10:36 PM

Post #1 of 75 (1895 views)
Permalink
Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org

Lua is now enabled on www.mediawiki.org.

Note that this is not a temporary deployment. You can rewrite existing
templates to use Lua, we're not going to break them by turning it off
again.

-- Tim Starling


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


katkov.juriy at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:01 AM

Post #2 of 75 (1814 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

Hi Tim!

Would you mind you please tell me where

1) the discussion about deploying Lua on mw.org ,
2) the announcement that it will be deployed on mw.org on Aug 22.
3) the roadmap and plans of further deployment of Scribunto on
Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects

...took place? I'm sure that such discussions has taken place
somewhere, because if not - that's not very mature behavior for open
source developer team.

-----
Yury Katkov



On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia> wrote:
> Lua is now enabled on www.mediawiki.org.
>
> Note that this is not a temporary deployment. You can rewrite existing
> templates to use Lua, we're not going to break them by turning it off
> again.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


amir.aharoni at mail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:06 AM

Post #3 of 75 (1814 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

Here it is:
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2012-August/062329.html

It was on August 15 and it says "next week".

--
Amir

2012/8/22 Yury Katkov <katkov.juriy [at] gmail>:
> Hi Tim!
>
> Would you mind you please tell me where
>
> 1) the discussion about deploying Lua on mw.org ,
> 2) the announcement that it will be deployed on mw.org on Aug 22.
> 3) the roadmap and plans of further deployment of Scribunto on
> Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects
>
> ...took place? I'm sure that such discussions has taken place
> somewhere, because if not - that's not very mature behavior for open
> source developer team.
>
> -----
> Yury Katkov
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>> Lua is now enabled on www.mediawiki.org.
>>
>> Note that this is not a temporary deployment. You can rewrite existing
>> templates to use Lua, we're not going to break them by turning it off
>> again.
>>
>> -- Tim Starling
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

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


midom.lists at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:11 AM

Post #4 of 75 (1815 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

> ...took place? I'm sure that such discussions has taken place
> somewhere, because if not - that's not very mature behavior for open
> source developer team.

why do you have to be such an ass, by the way?

Domas

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


katkov.juriy at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:27 AM

Post #5 of 75 (1812 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

I'm very sorry for my bureaucratic tone: I don't want to harm anyone
and I'm as excited about new feature as everybody here. That's just
seems like pretty important change on a pretty big website with a big
community: it's rude to just modify it in all sort of ways without
prior discussions, recognizable announcements and publicly available
plans.
-----
Yury Katkov



On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Amir E. Aharoni
<amir.aharoni [at] mail> wrote:
> Here it is:
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2012-August/062329.html
>
> It was on August 15 and it says "next week".
>
> --
> Amir
>
> 2012/8/22 Yury Katkov <katkov.juriy [at] gmail>:
>> Hi Tim!
>>
>> Would you mind you please tell me where
>>
>> 1) the discussion about deploying Lua on mw.org ,
>> 2) the announcement that it will be deployed on mw.org on Aug 22.
>> 3) the roadmap and plans of further deployment of Scribunto on
>> Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects
>>
>> ...took place? I'm sure that such discussions has taken place
>> somewhere, because if not - that's not very mature behavior for open
>> source developer team.
>>
>> -----
>> Yury Katkov
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>>> Lua is now enabled on www.mediawiki.org.
>>>
>>> Note that this is not a temporary deployment. You can rewrite existing
>>> templates to use Lua, we're not going to break them by turning it off
>>> again.
>>>
>>> -- Tim Starling
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


katkov.juriy at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:38 AM

Post #6 of 75 (1816 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

I have probably used very offensive English phrase without noticing,
sorry: I tried to be neutral.
-----
Yury Katkov



On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Domas Mituzas <midom.lists [at] gmail> wrote:
>> ...took place? I'm sure that such discussions has taken place
>> somewhere, because if not - that's not very mature behavior for open
>> source developer team.
>
> why do you have to be such an ass, by the way?
>
> Domas
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


tstarling at wikimedia

Aug 22, 2012, 3:18 AM

Post #7 of 75 (1813 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

Like Amir said, it was announced a week ago. There were no objections.

There were very few comments on the test2 deployment, probably because
the Labs deployment served the same purpose.

What we want from the mediawiki.org deployment is to start building a
community of people who will convert templates to Lua, not just
because they want to help us test the software, but also because they
want to get useful things done. Their comments will help to drive
future development.

Our goal is to deploy this extension to all Wikimedia wikis. If you
don't like that idea, now would be a good time to say something.

The schedule for deployment has not yet been decided. It will depend
on what bug reports and feature requests are submitted by the early
adopters. Performance issues may be found, once we have real-world
test cases. We will need to decide how much extra development work is
needed before a full-scale rollout.

It's been over a year since I started work on Lua support. From the
outset, I wanted it to be a project with a constrained scope, a
project that can be brought to completion, instead of trailing off
into vapour. I wanted to make something happen.

So my inclination is to push for deployment with a minimum of
additional development work. But I'm not the target audience; my
inclinations have to be weighed against the needs of the users.

-- Tim Starling

On 22/08/12 18:01, Yury Katkov wrote:
> Hi Tim!
>
> Would you mind you please tell me where
>
> 1) the discussion about deploying Lua on mw.org ,
> 2) the announcement that it will be deployed on mw.org on Aug 22.
> 3) the roadmap and plans of further deployment of Scribunto on
> Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects
>
> ...took place? I'm sure that such discussions has taken place
> somewhere, because if not - that's not very mature behavior for open
> source developer team.
>
> -----
> Yury Katkov
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 9:36 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia> wrote:
>> Lua is now enabled on www.mediawiki.org.
>>
>> Note that this is not a temporary deployment. You can rewrite existing
>> templates to use Lua, we're not going to break them by turning it off
>> again.
>>
>> -- Tim Starling
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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


helder.wiki at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 5:09 AM

Post #8 of 75 (1803 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

Are we allowed to import code licensed under GPL (or other free
*software* license) to the Module namespace?
(this was mentioned in the other thread[1])

Best regards,
Helder

[1] http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/290192

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:36 AM, Tim Starling <tstarling [at] wikimedia> wrote:
> Lua is now enabled on www.mediawiki.org.
>
> Note that this is not a temporary deployment. You can rewrite existing
> templates to use Lua, we're not going to break them by turning it off
> again.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


church.of.emacs.ml at googlemail

Aug 22, 2012, 5:27 AM

Post #9 of 75 (1809 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

On 08/22/2012 12:18 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
> So my inclination is to push for deployment with a minimum of
> additional development work. But I'm not the target audience; my
> inclinations have to be weighed against the needs of the users.

in the name of countless Wikipedians, who are struggeling with that
horrible Template/Magic word/ParserFunctions syntax, I say: thank you :)

This page is dedicated to its victims:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Church_of_emacs/Template_love

Cheers,
Tobias
Attachments: signature.asc (0.26 KB)


tylerromeo at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 8:08 AM

Post #10 of 75 (1801 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

I think Yury has a point. Now would be a good time to maybe discuss exactly
what's going on. As exciting a feature it may be, we cannot just "deploy
next week" and then have "the schedule for deployment not yet decided".
Stuff like this should have a legitimate plan. Furthermore, in alignment
with the previous thread on feature development, is there any hard
discussion on enwiki, etc. showing the users want this feature? I know sure
as hell that I'd love using this feature, but I don't represent all
template developers everywhere.

Some good questions we should probably answer (if they haven't been
answered already):

- Is Extension:Lua the extension being deployed? If so, why is it still
in Subversion and why is it marked experimental?
- What QA has been done on this extension? How many test cases have been
implemented?
- What are the performance impacts of using this v. regular parser
functions? (Also, what is faster, PECL or external interpreter?)
- Do global variables persist outside of an individual script, i.e., can
one global variable be used in multiple <lua> tags in the same template?
- Has there been any consideration of implementing a "standard library"?
For example, functions that will allow the creation of wikitables and other
mediawiki syntax.
- What values for the various wgLuaMax* variables are we planning on
using on WMF wikis? Has there been testing done to determine what a
reasonable maximum call time is?

I probably should have looked into this more earlier, but it's been a busy
week for me and I haven't had much time.

*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail



On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Tobias
<church.of.emacs.ml [at] googlemail>wrote:

> On 08/22/2012 12:18 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
> > So my inclination is to push for deployment with a minimum of
> > additional development work. But I'm not the target audience; my
> > inclinations have to be weighed against the needs of the users.
>
> in the name of countless Wikipedians, who are struggeling with that
> horrible Template/Magic word/ParserFunctions syntax, I say: thank you :)
>
> This page is dedicated to its victims:
> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Church_of_emacs/Template_love
>
> Cheers,
> Tobias
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Aug 22, 2012, 8:16 AM

Post #11 of 75 (1807 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

>I think Yury has a point. Now would be a good time to maybe discuss
>exactly what's going on. As exciting a feature it may be, we cannot just
>"deploy next week" and then have "the schedule for deployment not yet
>decided".
>
>Stuff like this should have a legitimate plan. Furthermore, in alignment
>with the previous thread on feature development, is there any hard
>discussion on enwiki, etc. showing the users want this feature? I know
>sure as hell that I'd love using this feature, but I don't represent all
>template developers everywhere.

Anyone else reminded of the recent topic:"Wikimedians are rightfully wary"

I think the sorts of things that MZMcBride was talking about in his op-ed.
Sorry for the slightly off topic post, but this seemed like as good a time
as any to point out a real life example.

Thank you,
Derric Atzrott


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


neil at tonal

Aug 22, 2012, 8:23 AM

Post #12 of 75 (1797 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

On 22/08/12 06:36, Tim Starling wrote:
> Lua is now enabled on www.mediawiki.org.
>
> Note that this is not a temporary deployment. You can rewrite existing
> templates to use Lua, we're not going to break them by turning it off
> again.
>
> -- Tim Starling
>
>

Just a thought: has someone yet considered a script for automatically
transforming existing templates from template wikisyntax to Lua? I
wouldn't have thought it would be too hard for many common cases,
although obviously it wouldn't make any sense to translate pathological
Wikitext templates into pathological Lua.

Neil


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


katkov.juriy at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 9:41 AM

Post #13 of 75 (1798 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

-----
Yury Katkov



On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 7:08 PM, Tyler Romeo <tylerromeo [at] gmail> wrote:
> I think Yury has a point. Now would be a good time to maybe discuss exactly
> what's going on. As exciting a feature it may be, we cannot just "deploy
> next week" and then have "the schedule for deployment not yet decided".
> Stuff like this should have a legitimate plan. Furthermore, in alignment
> with the previous thread on feature development, is there any hard
> discussion on enwiki, etc. showing the users want this feature? I know sure
> as hell that I'd love using this feature, but I don't represent all
> template developers everywhere.
>
> Some good questions we should probably answer (if they haven't been
> answered already):
>
> - Is Extension:Lua the extension being deployed? If so, why is it still
> in Subversion and why is it marked experimental?
as far as I can see this extensions have been deployed :
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Scribunto , not this one:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Lua

> - What QA has been done on this extension? How many test cases have been
> implemented?
> - What are the performance impacts of using this v. regular parser
> functions? (Also, what is faster, PECL or external interpreter?)
> - Do global variables persist outside of an individual script, i.e., can
> one global variable be used in multiple <lua> tags in the same template?
> - Has there been any consideration of implementing a "standard library"?
> For example, functions that will allow the creation of wikitables and other
> mediawiki syntax.
> - What values for the various wgLuaMax* variables are we planning on
> using on WMF wikis? Has there been testing done to determine what a
> reasonable maximum call time is?
>
> I probably should have looked into this more earlier, but it's been a busy
> week for me and I haven't had much time.
>
> *--*
> *Tyler Romeo*
> Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
> Major in Computer Science
> www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Tobias
> <church.of.emacs.ml [at] googlemail>wrote:
>
>> On 08/22/2012 12:18 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
>> > So my inclination is to push for deployment with a minimum of
>> > additional development work. But I'm not the target audience; my
>> > inclinations have to be weighed against the needs of the users.
>>
>> in the name of countless Wikipedians, who are struggeling with that
>> horrible Template/Magic word/ParserFunctions syntax, I say: thank you :)
>>
>> This page is dedicated to its victims:
>> http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Church_of_emacs/Template_love
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Tobias
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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

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


rkaldari at wikimedia

Aug 22, 2012, 10:39 AM

Post #14 of 75 (1789 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

Hey Tyler,
Many of these issues have already been discussed on this mailing list. Read
Rob and Tim's emails from last week to start with. As explained in the
previous emails, the extension being deployed is Scribunto. Regarding
performance testing, Rob said this would be done once the extension was
deployed to mediawiki.org: "From there, we'll need some time figuring out
the performance characteristics of this (making sure we're actually coming
out ahead) as well as converting some key templates over." Many of the
other questions are covered at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Scribunto.

And not to be overly dismissive, but the idea that Tim needs to prove that
en.wiki wants this feature is absurd. The template system on Wikipedia is
BROKEN. It takes over 30 seconds for the parser to render large articles,
and articles with a really large number of citation templates can't render
at all, they simply error with a timeout. The only reason Lua/Scribunto was
developed is because the en.wiki community has been vocally complaining
about this problem FOR 3 YEARS. Check out
https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19262 for example.

Ryan Kaldari

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Tyler Romeo <tylerromeo [at] gmail> wrote:

> I think Yury has a point. Now would be a good time to maybe discuss exactly
> what's going on. As exciting a feature it may be, we cannot just "deploy
> next week" and then have "the schedule for deployment not yet decided".
> Stuff like this should have a legitimate plan. Furthermore, in alignment
> with the previous thread on feature development, is there any hard
> discussion on enwiki, etc. showing the users want this feature? I know sure
> as hell that I'd love using this feature, but I don't represent all
> template developers everywhere.
>
> Some good questions we should probably answer (if they haven't been
> answered already):
>
> - Is Extension:Lua the extension being deployed? If so, why is it still
> in Subversion and why is it marked experimental?
> - What QA has been done on this extension? How many test cases have been
> implemented?
> - What are the performance impacts of using this v. regular parser
> functions? (Also, what is faster, PECL or external interpreter?)
> - Do global variables persist outside of an individual script, i.e., can
> one global variable be used in multiple <lua> tags in the same template?
> - Has there been any consideration of implementing a "standard library"?
> For example, functions that will allow the creation of wikitables and
> other
> mediawiki syntax.
> - What values for the various wgLuaMax* variables are we planning on
> using on WMF wikis? Has there been testing done to determine what a
> reasonable maximum call time is?
>
> I probably should have looked into this more earlier, but it's been a busy
> week for me and I haven't had much time.
>
> *--*
> *Tyler Romeo*
> Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
> Major in Computer Science
> www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail
>
>
>
> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Tobias
> <church.of.emacs.ml [at] googlemail>wrote:
>
> > On 08/22/2012 12:18 PM, Tim Starling wrote:
> > > So my inclination is to push for deployment with a minimum of
> > > additional development work. But I'm not the target audience; my
> > > inclinations have to be weighed against the needs of the users.
> >
> > in the name of countless Wikipedians, who are struggeling with that
> > horrible Template/Magic word/ParserFunctions syntax, I say: thank you :)
> >
> > This page is dedicated to its victims:
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Church_of_emacs/Template_love
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Tobias
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l [at] lists
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


bawolff+wn at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 12:17 PM

Post #15 of 75 (1791 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Ryan Kaldari <rkaldari [at] wikimedia> wrote:
> Hey Tyler,
> Many of these issues have already been discussed on this mailing list. Read
> Rob and Tim's emails from last week to start with. As explained in the
> previous emails, the extension being deployed is Scribunto. Regarding
> performance testing, Rob said this would be done once the extension was
> deployed to mediawiki.org: "From there, we'll need some time figuring out
> the performance characteristics of this (making sure we're actually coming
> out ahead) as well as converting some key templates over." Many of the
> other questions are covered at
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Scribunto.
>
> And not to be overly dismissive, but the idea that Tim needs to prove that
> en.wiki wants this feature is absurd. The template system on Wikipedia is
> BROKEN. It takes over 30 seconds for the parser to render large articles,
> and articles with a really large number of citation templates can't render
> at all, they simply error with a timeout. The only reason Lua/Scribunto was
> developed is because the en.wiki community has been vocally complaining
> about this problem FOR 3 YEARS. Check out
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19262 for example.
>
> Ryan Kaldari
>

Furthermore, mediawiki.org is a community essentially owned by the
developers, not to mention this
feature is non-user facing. If people don't want to use it, they don't have to.

I do believe consensus should be sought when enabling extensions like
moodbar and what not on enwikipedia,
but this is nothing like that situation.

--bawolff

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


tylerromeo at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 12:24 PM

Post #16 of 75 (1783 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

Ah, I thought it was the Lua extension (made sense to me at the time :P).
Thanks for pointing that out.

And not to be overly dismissive, but the idea that Tim needs to prove that
> en.wiki wants this feature is absurd. The template system on Wikipedia is
> BROKEN. It takes over 30 seconds for the parser to render large articles,
> and articles with a really large number of citation templates can't render
> at all, they simply error with a timeout. The only reason Lua/Scribunto was
> developed is because the en.wiki community has been vocally complaining
> about this problem FOR 3 YEARS. Check out
> https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19262 for example.


But there's a difference between an issue and a solution. Yes, the
templating system is broken, and I'm sure many an editor will confirm that,
but just because a system is broken does not mean Lua is automatically the
solution. To put it in other words: just because people want a better
templating system does not imply they want Lua. What discussion, if any,
has there been that WMF wikis want Lua as their templating replacement. As
said before, mediawiki.org is mostly developers, so there's no problem with
that, but with the op-ed on the Signpost, we should seriously question
whether the community wants this feature before randomly forcing it on
them.

*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail



On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:17 PM, bawolff <bawolff+wn [at] gmail> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Ryan Kaldari <rkaldari [at] wikimedia>
> wrote:
> > Hey Tyler,
> > Many of these issues have already been discussed on this mailing list.
> Read
> > Rob and Tim's emails from last week to start with. As explained in the
> > previous emails, the extension being deployed is Scribunto. Regarding
> > performance testing, Rob said this would be done once the extension was
> > deployed to mediawiki.org: "From there, we'll need some time figuring
> out
> > the performance characteristics of this (making sure we're actually
> coming
> > out ahead) as well as converting some key templates over." Many of the
> > other questions are covered at
> > https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Scribunto.
> >
> > And not to be overly dismissive, but the idea that Tim needs to prove
> that
> > en.wiki wants this feature is absurd. The template system on Wikipedia is
> > BROKEN. It takes over 30 seconds for the parser to render large articles,
> > and articles with a really large number of citation templates can't
> render
> > at all, they simply error with a timeout. The only reason Lua/Scribunto
> was
> > developed is because the en.wiki community has been vocally complaining
> > about this problem FOR 3 YEARS. Check out
> > https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19262 for example.
> >
> > Ryan Kaldari
> >
>
> Furthermore, mediawiki.org is a community essentially owned by the
> developers, not to mention this
> feature is non-user facing. If people don't want to use it, they don't
> have to.
>
> I do believe consensus should be sought when enabling extensions like
> moodbar and what not on enwikipedia,
> but this is nothing like that situation.
>
> --bawolff
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


rlane32 at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 12:38 PM

Post #17 of 75 (1790 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

> But there's a difference between an issue and a solution. Yes, the
> templating system is broken, and I'm sure many an editor will confirm that,
> but just because a system is broken does not mean Lua is automatically the
> solution. To put it in other words: just because people want a better
> templating system does not imply they want Lua. What discussion, if any,
> has there been that WMF wikis want Lua as their templating replacement. As
> said before, mediawiki.org is mostly developers, so there's no problem with
> that, but with the op-ed on the Signpost, we should seriously question
> whether the community wants this feature before randomly forcing it on
> them.
>

Which community should be consulted on this technical decision? What
if enwiki wants prolog and dewiki wants lua and enwikitionary wants
javascript? Occasionally technical decisions have to be made by the
developers. The templating language is a technical decision. It's
really not something that is up for editor community debate.

This decision was hashed out over months (really a couple of years if
we consider the original iteration of this idea) with the developer
community. If the editor community wishes to take part in these kinds
of decisions, they should join wikitech-l.

- Ryan

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


datzrott at alizeepathology

Aug 22, 2012, 12:49 PM

Post #18 of 75 (1787 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

>Which community should be consulted on this technical decision? What if
>enwiki wants prolog and dewiki wants lua and enwikitionary wants
>javascript? Occasionally technical decisions have to be made by the
>developers. The templating language is a technical decision. It's really
>not something that is up for editor community debate.
>
>This decision was hashed out over months (really a couple of years if we
>consider the original iteration of this idea) with the developer
>community. If the editor community wishes to take part in these kinds of
>decisions, they should join wikitech-l.

Most lay users likely won't be able to understand the discussions that
take place on wikitech-l. Hell most lay users don't even know it exists.

While I won't weigh in on whether or not the choice of Lua was our
decision to make or not, I don't think that the argument that editors
should join wikitech-l is a good one.

Perhaps the ambassadors mailing list? But wikitech-l? No.

I am curious though to see if we ever even mentioned this idea to the
editors on at least enwiki though. I think such knowledge would greatly
help everyone else here in evaluating whether or not we included the
community enough on this decision.

Thank you,
Derric Atzrott


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


tylerromeo at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 12:51 PM

Post #19 of 75 (1783 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

This is the exact kind of attitude the op-ed in the Signpost is addressing.
When making major feature decision, such as redoing the entire templating
system, we cannot just say to editors "oh, if you want some input, go and
join our mailing list". That's just a passive-aggressive way of pushing
editors out of the conversation. How many purely editors, i.e., not
developers, are on this list actively participating in discussion?

And this isn't a technical decision, it's a requirements decision. We're
not deciding what algorithm to use, or what object design to implement,
we're deciding what features would be best for the users of Wikipedia. The
reason this extension was implemented (hopefully) was so that users could
have a better templating experience, but how can you possibly assume to
know what is best for the user without asking the users themselves? And no,
we cannot be expected to consult every language wiki, but on the other hand
we cannot completely ignore the community and suddenly launch this new
extension on them as if they'd known about it for years.

*--*
*Tyler Romeo*
Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
Major in Computer Science
www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail



On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Ryan Lane <rlane32 [at] gmail> wrote:

> > But there's a difference between an issue and a solution. Yes, the
> > templating system is broken, and I'm sure many an editor will confirm
> that,
> > but just because a system is broken does not mean Lua is automatically
> the
> > solution. To put it in other words: just because people want a better
> > templating system does not imply they want Lua. What discussion, if any,
> > has there been that WMF wikis want Lua as their templating replacement.
> As
> > said before, mediawiki.org is mostly developers, so there's no problem
> with
> > that, but with the op-ed on the Signpost, we should seriously question
> > whether the community wants this feature before randomly forcing it on
> > them.
> >
>
> Which community should be consulted on this technical decision? What
> if enwiki wants prolog and dewiki wants lua and enwikitionary wants
> javascript? Occasionally technical decisions have to be made by the
> developers. The templating language is a technical decision. It's
> really not something that is up for editor community debate.
>
> This decision was hashed out over months (really a couple of years if
> we consider the original iteration of this idea) with the developer
> community. If the editor community wishes to take part in these kinds
> of decisions, they should join wikitech-l.
>
> - Ryan
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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


dzahn at wikimedia

Aug 22, 2012, 12:54 PM

Post #20 of 75 (1783 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:49 PM, Derric Atzrott
<datzrott [at] alizeepathology> wrote:

> Most lay users likely won't be able to understand the discussions that
> take place on wikitech-l.

But.. If that is true then how would they be able to know if they want
Lua as a solution in the first place.

--
Daniel Zahn <dzahn [at] wikimedia>
Operations Engineer

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


rlane32 at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 12:58 PM

Post #21 of 75 (1786 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

> Most lay users likely won't be able to understand the discussions that
> take place on wikitech-l. Hell most lay users don't even know it exists.
>

Lay users don't write templates either. People who write templates are
wizards. Templates make my eyes bleed and my mind hurt, and I've been
developing for quite a long time.

> While I won't weigh in on whether or not the choice of Lua was our
> decision to make or not, I don't think that the argument that editors
> should join wikitech-l is a good one.
>

I don't think the editor community has much reason to participate. The
template creator community does. They are more than technical to
understand things on wikitech-l.

> Perhaps the ambassadors mailing list? But wikitech-l? No.
>
> I am curious though to see if we ever even mentioned this idea to the
> editors on at least enwiki though. I think such knowledge would greatly
> help everyone else here in evaluating whether or not we included the
> community enough on this decision.
>

The "community" is not a single thing. The community is made up of
hundreds of sub-communities. If people are interested in technical
decisions, they need to participate where technical decisions are
made.

- Ryan

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


innocentkiller at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:01 PM

Post #22 of 75 (1788 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 3:51 PM, Tyler Romeo <tylerromeo [at] gmail> wrote:
> This is the exact kind of attitude the op-ed in the Signpost is addressing.
> When making major feature decision, such as redoing the entire templating
> system, we cannot just say to editors "oh, if you want some input, go and
> join our mailing list". That's just a passive-aggressive way of pushing
> editors out of the conversation. How many purely editors, i.e., not
> developers, are on this list actively participating in discussion?
>

Which communities? Engaging N editing communities just doesn't
scale. Nor, to be perfectly honest, do I think its the appropriate
venue. I expect people to join the places technical discussions take
place (this list + mediawiki.org), just as I expect I should have to
join a wiki's discussion forums to discuss content/community things.
I'm perfectly willing to engage anyone on anything I work on, but I
don't want to repeat myself in 20 different places.

A long time ago, technical discussions happened on Meta. It was
moved off of Meta since there's enough content to warrant its own
wiki. Perhaps we can improve on getting notices out to people (hey,
we're discussing FooBar, come talk with us [here]), but trying to
shift the discussion to hundreds of individual wikis just doesn't work
for me.

-Chad

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


dgerard at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:03 PM

Post #23 of 75 (1786 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

On 22 August 2012 20:58, Ryan Lane <rlane32 [at] gmail> wrote:

> I don't think the editor community has much reason to participate. The
> template creator community does. They are more than technical to
> understand things on wikitech-l.


AIUI the Lua idea was explicitly run past the few people who write the
insanely horrible brainfuck-like ParserFunctions templates. (Is this
correct?) They would be the relevant part of the editor community -
most of the editor community just want the template itself to work,
they neither know nor care about the details of the plumbing.

So, has anyone translated {{cite}} to Lua? Is it comprehensible? Does
it run faster?


> The "community" is not a single thing. The community is made up of
> hundreds of sub-communities. If people are interested in technical
> decisions, they need to participate where technical decisions are
> made.


Well, one would think so.


- d.

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


bawolff+wn at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:04 PM

Post #24 of 75 (1781 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 4:51 PM, Tyler Romeo <tylerromeo [at] gmail> wrote:
> This is the exact kind of attitude the op-ed in the Signpost is addressing.
> When making major feature decision, such as redoing the entire templating
> system, we cannot just say to editors "oh, if you want some input, go and
> join our mailing list". That's just a passive-aggressive way of pushing
> editors out of the conversation. How many purely editors, i.e., not
> developers, are on this list actively participating in discussion?
>
> And this isn't a technical decision, it's a requirements decision. We're
> not deciding what algorithm to use, or what object design to implement,
> we're deciding what features would be best for the users of Wikipedia. The
> reason this extension was implemented (hopefully) was so that users could
> have a better templating experience, but how can you possibly assume to
> know what is best for the user without asking the users themselves? And no,
> we cannot be expected to consult every language wiki, but on the other hand
> we cannot completely ignore the community and suddenly launch this new
> extension on them as if they'd known about it for years.
>
> *--*
> *Tyler Romeo*
> Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2015
> Major in Computer Science
> www.whizkidztech.com | tylerromeo [at] gmail
>
>
>

I think its a little late for this. I'm pretty sure there was
discussions with (template editor) users about lua years ago.
The whole lua thing has literally been in discussion in some form or
another for probably at least 5 years.


From what I understand lua was not chosen just randomly by throwing a
bunch of languages in a hat,
there were many requirements, such as sandbox-ability, performance
concerns, and ease of implementing
resource limits, etc. If I recall lua came out the clear winner.

-bawolff

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


nadreck at gmail

Aug 22, 2012, 1:06 PM

Post #25 of 75 (1782 views)
Permalink
Re: Lua deployed to www.mediawiki.org [In reply to]

On Wed, Aug 22, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Tyler Romeo <tylerromeo [at] gmail> wrote:

> And this isn't a technical decision, it's a requirements decision. We're
> not deciding what algorithm to use, or what object design to implement,
> we're deciding what features would be best for the users of Wikipedia.


I'm not sure I entirely agree with this assessment. The community has
complained about the current templating system -- the requirements decision
is arguably that something should be done to improve how templates are
created and their overall performance. The technical decision, i.e. what
technology to use to solve this issue, is what was decided by selecting
LUA. That said, I do agree that we should plan the roll-out rather than
just tossing it over the wall -- preparing some initial documentation and
tutorials to show HOW and WHY it's easier/faster than the old system would
go a long way (imho) to assuage complaints of disconnect from what the
community wants.

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

First page Previous page 1 2 3 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.