from T153063#2964507:
"Someone (myself, unless someone wants to be faster) should review them and extract action points (if any), turning them into tasks. We should be looking especially at points that should be taken into account in our upcoming annual plan and our various teams goals."
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resolved | Qgil | T153063 Wikimedia Foundation Technology and Product Q&A | |||
| Resolved | CKoerner_WMF | T156659 Review "Wikimedia Foundation Technology and Product Q&A" from Dev Summit and create tasks to address |
From the notes I was able to surface the following efforts and responses. I provide links to on what is being done for each as much as I could. While not comprehensive it aims to provide further information on the topics raised during the dev summit Q&A.
- How can we ensure timely reviews of volunteer contributions to MediaWiki code?
Bryan Davis and the Wikimedia cloud services team were mentioned in the answer to this question. Their efforts may assist here as the team develops. The additional creation of the 'new' MediaWiki core team and TC as a contact point for MediaWiki users will also address these concerns.
In the developer wishlist the #3 item was “Implement a sane code-review process for MediaWiki JS/CSS pages on Wikimedia sites” which is tracked in T71445
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Code_review/Getting_reviews also provides information on assistance with code review.
- During the next year or so, what balance do you think we should strike between new projects and technical debt?
Victoria and Wes both mentioned more focus on the balance in planning (quarterly and annual). It is also being discussed for the 2017-2017 Annual plan.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Annual_Plan_2017-18
Tech debt is also being worked on through various other efforts:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Developer_Summit/2017/First_Tech_Debt_Bash
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_Wishlist
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Technical_debt
Technical-Debt tag here in Phabricator
- How can we encourage more volunteer contributions to the MediaWiki codebase?
Some existing work is under way, with retention of team goals being a goal for the Technical Collaboration (Developer Relations) team.
The developer wishlist also contains an item ranked #29 "Organize a Wikimedia developer contest to recognize and promote best projects" T147545
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137214
In the draft for 2017-2018 annual plan there is an item titled "Onboarding New Developers"
V: yesterday's session: "platforms are products" too - could not agree more
Work around a 'new' MediaWiki core team with dedicated engineers and product managers is one step to address this concern.
Can we better support the community *without* bringing their code into core?
V: My expectation, there should be a WMF team that supports the outside community.
TC will be stepping into this role to liaise with folks in the 'third-party' community.
V: Starting things is easy. Stopping things is nearly impossible.
GWicke: Upstream code, we've adopted quite a few projects, and contribute some things back but they're often invisible. We should manage those relationships [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Upstream_projects ] a little more consciously. They have their own communities.
Unknown at the moment
V: It's the job of the PM/PO, that all the input is organized and put into roadmap. Without a focus, or person whose job it is to make these calls, it's like throwing pasta at the wall - things don't stick. Back to earlier point about perhaps a PM for core components.
MediaWiki Core team - treating MW as a product and resourced as such.
MoritzSchubert: I work on Math. The game changer where it started to be fun instead of frustrating, was attending Wikimania where I met people. Actual people, outside of places like phabricator. I'm a researcher, introduce / help students (to MW), they often have the same problems, asking questions in places they get no replies. Perhaps a guaranteed contact, for each person who wants to contribute, so that they get good and honest feedback. If something is crap they need to know it.
W: One challenge I've noticed, We do office hours etc but lacking some of that more personal connection, e.g. videochats or personal engagement like hackathons etc, I'd like to see more of that too. As a remote staffer I experience that a lot, too.
More structure to tech talks? Perhaps more local hackathons? @Rfarrand could you help summarize the work that's going on here?
Moriel: I do some mentoring. Our documentation is atrocious, huge barrier to entry. It's good to say "document more", and we often do for the code, but we're not trained to write onwiki docs. Can we get someone for this, a tech-writer?
Create a developer documentation special interest group - T156301
From the developer wishlist: "Organize a MediaWiki Documentation Day (similar to the Gerrit Cleanup Day)" T126500
And this category of proposals: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_Wishlist/2017/Documentation
W: Great tools, good docs, not having to go through all people to get something done, clear set of guidelines. COnfidence that it's been thoroughly reviewed and isn't going to blow anything up. Providing a stable labs environment is important. Freedom to test things. Not do all the work ourselves, empower others. Bring more volunteers in, more remote friendly within WMF.
This goes back to empowering folks with access, labs, code review, better documentation, support and encouragement for external folks to participate.
The Wikimedia Cloud Services team to combine Labs and Tools will address this to some degree.
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimedia-l/2017-February/086343.html
- What is the biggest threat to Wikimedia/MediaWiki in terms of technology?
V: Couple of things. Monolithicity? In 1978 you wrote everything yourself in order to make it work. Nowadays we rely on integration and systems.
We are at a disadvantage today regarding mobility. It almost feels like the world has passed us by when it comes to editing.
T158181 is an [EPIC] task, but those curious can follow there.
W: for me the risk is that if we don't fund team to work on roadmap
Commit to a date for something. It's [not in stone] but good as a milestone to work towards.
Again, the MediaWiki core team and the contact point of Technical Collaboration is a begging to address these concerns regarding commitments and roadmaps for that part of the tech.
I think it does, and very well. Basically, all the questions and requests have been reported before and have either ongoing efforts or are waiting to be taken. No new action points.
Thank you!