Erik Bernhardson | 30 Sep 22:57 2014

Wrapping signatures with a <span> for discoverability

There is currently a patch in gerrit, , that has been hanging around
for a few months.  To me it seems like an easy patch with some obvious

JackMcbarn suggested this might need wider discussion/notice so putting it
up here to get a little more visibility.

Erik B.
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l <at>
Sumana Harihareswara | 30 Sep 22:10 2014

suggestions to reduce code review backlog

TL;DR: ask specific newish people to review specific changesets; pair
program; nominate maintainers.

I did a little poking-around in , especially , and on Gerrit
to check out our code review situation, although of course more people's
spot analysis or systematic assessments would be welcome.

It seems we have somewhat more committers and commits than a year ago
(yay!) but not more than, say, 10% more.

Some hypotheses that I was unable to prove or disprove:

* that there's been a freak spike in backlogged work
* that HHVM or some other project is soaking up the review times of people
who used to do a lot of general MediaWiki code review

But I will note that the group of people with +2 access in MediaWiki core,members has fewer people
outside WMF/WMDE than it used to. (I remember when there were ~13 and now
there are ~8.) And, although we have many praiseworthy exceptions, there's
a tendency for WMF staff and contractors to -- legitimately -- concentrate
on writing and reviewing the code they're paid to work on (I presume it's
the same for WMDE), and thus to make less time for reviewing code outside
of those projects.

On the interiority of becoming a reviewer:

Here is a bit of a digression on capacity-building. Back when I was
volunteer development coordinator, I thought my two biggest jobs were: 1)
(Continue reading)

Derric Atzrott | 30 Sep 15:08 2014

Tor and Anonymous Users (I know, we've had this discussion a million times)

Hello everyone,

I've been a Tor user for many years and I frequently make use of anonymising
proxies services.  Recently (yesterday), I set up my first Tor relay.[1]  This
has once again gotten the use of Tor and other anonymising services with
Wikipedia on my mind again.

In a recent article on the Tor blog,[2] Wikipedia is actually called out a
number of times for being unfriendly to Tor, and I think they make a good point.

"[H]ow can we quantify the loss to Wikipedia, and to society at large, from
turning away anonymous contributors? Wikipedians say 'we have to blacklist all
these IP addresses because of trolls' and 'Wikipedia is rotting because nobody
wants to edit it anymore' in the same breath, and we believe these points
are related."

There must be a way that we can allow users to work from Tor.  My understanding
of why we block Tor categorically is that it is very hard to block individual
Tor users.  Perhaps we could allow Tor users to only edit pages if they make
an account?  That would allow us to at least block those accounts, which
increases the cost of being problematic on Wikipedia a bit.

Or to take from the blog post, perhaps Tor users could be issued a certificate
that they could use to prove their identity from one session to another.  New
Tor users would need to prove they are the same person as someone we already
trust or their edits would be put in some sort of review queue.

Or combine the two and new accounts made from Tor connections would need to have
their edits reviewed, or perhaps just wouldn't get autopatrolled status as
quickly (if ever).
(Continue reading)

Quim Gil | 30 Sep 11:28 2014

FOSS OPW open to submissions + Ascend Project

Hi, all FOSS Outreach Program for Women participants need to sign in as
candidates or mentors at

Mentors can find specific documentation at

The deadline for submissions is Oct 22 2014, 07:00 pm UTC
Selection decisions will be posted on Nov 12 2014, 07:00 pm UTC

As a novelty in Round 9, all Ascend Project participants, regardless of
gender, are welcome to apply. Ascent is a mentorship and barrier-removing
accelerator program designed to explicitly invite, include, and support
adult learners in making a first technical contribution to Open Source

After some discussions, this is a first step expanding this outreach
program to other groups under-represented in the free software community.
I'm personally very happy to see actual progress! Kudos to the GNOME
Foundation and the FOSS OPW supporters.

Quim Gil
Engineering Community Manager  <at>  Wikimedia Foundation
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l <at>
(Continue reading)

Quim Gil | 30 Sep 10:40 2014

OPW: Wikipedia article translation metrics (was Re: Outreach Program for Women/Round 9)

Hi Roxana,

On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Roxana Necula <necula.roxana91 <at>>

> But before diving into the code and do the suggested micro-task, I first
> wanted to fix some annoying little bugs, starting with bug #25163
> <>.

Feel free to comment on this bug report that you are working on it. The
reporter and at least six users CCed will be happy seeing some movement

> So far everything
> is working fine in my local development environment, but I am still trying
> to familiarize myself with the code review / patching part.

Just in case:

So, to wrap things up, my question is if I am heading towards the right
> direction, and if not, what advice do you have.

I agree with Brian, you seem to be heading to the right direction, and the
fact that you are communicating your intentions in wikitech-l is also a
good symptom. I just took the liberty of editing the subject of the thread
to make it more clear.


(Continue reading)

Roxana Necula | 29 Sep 23:39 2014

Outreach Program for Women/Round 9


My name is Roxana and I am an engineering student at the Polytechnic
University of Bucharest, Romania.
I would like to be part of MediaWiki open-source community and participate
in the Outreach Program for Women round 9.
The project that interests me is Wikipedia article translation metrics
But before diving into the code and do the suggested micro-task, I first
wanted to fix some annoying little bugs, starting with bug #25163
<>. So far everything
is working fine in my local development environment, but I am still trying
to familiarize myself with the code review / patching part.

So, to wrap things up, my question is if I am heading towards the right
direction, and if not, what advice do you have.

Thank you,
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l <at>
Daniel Friesen | 29 Sep 10:16 2014

State of the DumpHTML extension

The DumpHTML extension looks like it's in a pretty bad state, it doesn't
work at all in the current version of MediaWiki.

This seems to be an unfortunate symptom of how it's used and how it's
treated by core developers.

DumpHTML is most useful when someone is shutting down and archiving
their wiki, so it doesn't get tested regularly.

The act of creating a version of wiki pages suitable for offline use
from static files is something which inherently requires different
behaviour from things deep within core.

Because DumpHTML has been segregated into an extension and core doesn't
support an offline/dump mode internally DumpHTML has to use a bunch of
hacks to make core behave properly during the dump.

Then, because they are completely unaware of DumpHTML's needs, core
developers make improvements to core that then break DumpHTML without
providing it an alternative interface to get what it needs out of core.

For one DumpHTML needs to proxy and mess with file repo behaviours. To
do that it messed with properties like thumbScriptUrl, but then those
properties were protected leaving DumpHTML unsupported.
This was reported as a bug a month ago, which has gone relatively unnoticed:

It also subclassed RepoGroup and since it proxied existing repo
instances instead of working with repo info it had to bypass the
__constructor. But then a $repoGroup->cache was added to the
(Continue reading)

reporter | 29 Sep 05:00 2014

Bugzilla Weekly Report

MediaWiki Bugzilla Report for September 22, 2014 - September 29, 2014

Status changes this week

Reports changed/set to UNCONFIRMED:  4                             
Reports changed/set to NEW        :  24                            
Reports changed/set to ASSIGNED   :  34                            
Reports changed/set to REOPENED   :  17                            
Reports changed/set to PATCH_TO_RE:  87                            
Reports changed/set to RESOLVED   :  372                           
Reports changed/set to VERIFIED   :  16                            

Total reports still open              : 15617                         
Total bugs still open                 : 9452                          
Total non-lowest prio. bugs still open: 9124                          
Total enhancements still open         : 6165                          

Reports created this week: 296                           

Resolutions for the week:

Reports marked FIXED     :  193                           
Reports marked DUPLICATE :  28                            
Reports marked INVALID   :  17                            
Reports marked WORKSFORME:  32                            
Reports marked WONTFIX   :  101                           

Specific Product/Component Resolutions & User Metrics 

Created reports per component
(Continue reading)

Tim Starling | 29 Sep 03:30 2014

RFC meeting this week

The next RFC meeting will discuss the following RFC:

* API roadmap (Brad Jorsch, Yuri Astrakhan)

The API roadmap was last discussed at the Architecture Summit in January.

The meeting will be on the IRC channel #wikimedia-office on at the following time:

* UTC: Wednesday 21:00
* US PDT: Wednesday 14:00
* Europe CEST: Wednesday 23:00
* Australia AEST: Thursday 07:00

-- Tim Starling

Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l <at>
Jackmcbarn | 29 Sep 02:17 2014

Removal of Scribunto's "Allow saving code with errors" option

Scribunto has an option to allow code to be saved even if it contains
syntax errors that prevent it from ever working. The original reason for
this feature was to make it more convenient to save incomplete code.
However, in practice, this has never been used for its intended purpose,
and users who don't know any Lua are breaking otherwise-functional modules
with it. Because of this, and because it's easy enough to save incomplete
code by simply wrapping it all in a multiline comment, I plan to remove the
option unless objections are raised.

Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l <at>
Petr Bena | 28 Sep 08:15 2014

IRC bots for phab


Is currently someone working on this thing? I might be able to help
with this task at some point. So in case you are working on it or
would like to get any help with this, let me know, either here or on
irc (petan), thanks

Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l <at>