> Please can you list some of the more complicated commits that you've authored - e.g. more than typo fixes or rote commits.
>>! In T206927#4663919, @Kizule wrote:
> [...]
> I can't provide for `mediawiki/*`. I am sorry.
>>! In T206927#4664151, @Bawolff wrote:
> I'm sorry, but in my mind that is a minimum requirement for +2 in mediawiki/*
2019:
>>! In T215112#4922948, @Krenair wrote:
> I have to agree, adding a few comments with @covers does not come close to the generally expected requirements for this.
> To answer your question about what would qualify as an actual code contribution you should at least be altering the logic used in the code that gets run by the wiki.
2019 #2:
>>! In T231758#5494339, @Bawolff wrote:
> Im sorry, i dont mean to be harsh, but you are very far away from the expected level of familarity with mw code and quite frankly skill, expected of someone with +2 rights
2020:
>>! In T243700#5832156, @Kizule wrote:
>>>! In T243700#5832134, @DannyS712 wrote:
>> @Zoranzoki21 can you give some examples of more complex contributions? A lot of your commits appear to be fairly rote, even if they are large (eg adding eslint includes a large update to package-lock.json).
> Hi @DannyS712. Thanks for engaging in the discussion. Every day, I make changes that are of great importance. [[ https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/375525 | This]] is my first patch which I made on Gerrit. In terms of complicated patches, I don't think we look on it in the same way, for me some patches like adding phpcs/eslint and converting extension to use extension registration, are complicated (some less some more depends on the case).
> [@Urbanecm: In another words, this says "No, no such commits"]