Page MenuHomePhabricator
Paste P3350

ArchCom-RFC-2016W27-irc-E226.txt
ActivePublic
Actions

Authored by • RobLa-WMF on Jul 6 2016, 10:04 PM.
Tags
None
Referenced Files
F4246080: ArchCom-RFC-2016W27-irc-E226.txt
Jul 6 2016, 10:04 PM
Subscribers
None
21:02:12 <TimStarling> #startmeeting RFC: Improve the per-programming-language listings for our tools
21:02:12 <wm-labs-meetbot`> Meeting started Wed Jul 6 21:02:12 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is TimStarling. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:02:12 <wm-labs-meetbot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:02:12 <wm-labs-meetbot`> The meeting name has been set to 'rfc__improve_the_per_programming_language_listings_for_our_tools'
21:02:54 <quiddity> Hi all.
21:02:58 <robla> #link https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E226
21:03:04 <TimStarling> #topic RFC: Improve the per-programming-language listings for our tools | Wikimedia meeting channel | Please note: Channel is logged and publicly posted (DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTE) | Logs: http://bots.wmflabs.org/~wm-bot/logs/%23wikimedia-office/
21:03:16 <SMalyshev> hi all
21:03:35 <MaxSem> do we have ops representatives here?
21:04:37 <robla> this is about getting a better sense of what our status quo is
21:04:50 <robla> (at least, that's what I'm hoping to get out of it)
21:04:53 * ostriches is idly watching
21:04:54 <quiddity> MaxSem, I beleive we're mainly (at least initially) focusing on the use-case of "how to support newcomer developers". We might (not up to me) get into the larger ops@ issue later on.
21:05:22 <quiddity> As I see it, the main issue is where (what page(s)) to direct newcomers to, when they are looking for new projects to work on, and they already know just 1 or 2 languages.
21:05:23 <Scott_WUaS> Hi All
21:05:24 <SMalyshev> how we define "wikimedia cluster"? i.e., are maps or wdqs part of it for this purpose?
21:05:37 <Krinkle> DanielK_WMDE: OK. I made a very basic draft at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/image_and_oldimage_tables#3._Replace_with_MCR - But feel free to expand on the page and/or on phab.
21:05:38 <quiddity> There are a number of pages that contain partial information (listed in the bottom of the description of https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T136866 )
21:06:03 <quiddity> There are 2 sites (github and openhub) that collate information automatically/semi-automatically. Plus our own scattered and incomplete listing on mediawiki.org
21:06:18 <quiddity> I lean towards mergism for documentation, to prevent fragmentation, hence I'm hesitant about starting the new page at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Programming_languages - but I'm also not a dev, so ...
21:06:29 <quiddity> * Do we want to give a bunch of search links such as https://github.com/search?l=Java&q=org%3Awikimedia+&type=Repositories and/or https://www.openhub.net/p?query=wikimedia+java&sort=relevance
21:06:31 <robla> SMalyshev: I believe so
21:06:47 <quiddity> * Do we want to provide links to our own existing pages that contain some of this information, and focus on improving/updating them. E.g. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker#Appendix and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Client_code
21:06:59 <SMalyshev> ok, then we need at least Java there, we run a bunch of Java tools
21:07:02 <quiddity> Or something else? [EOM]
21:07:28 <TimStarling> I would also prefer to see a big table or list
21:07:41 <legoktm> there's also https://www.whatcanidoforwikimedia.org/
21:08:22 <legoktm> (compare with http://whatcanidoformozilla.org/ for example)
21:08:56 <legoktm> http://whatcanidoformozilla.org/#!/progornoprog/proglang/py is their language selector thing
21:09:14 <quiddity> TimStarling, ah, so something that combines everything in the existing listings, such as the links in https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Conventions_navigation and links to the subsections of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Client_code ?
21:09:57 <Scott_WUaS> As a possible newcomer developer (and having donated WUaS to Wikidata last autumn), I'd be interested in a page that even would precede https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Programming_languages.
21:10:26 <TimStarling> yes on the first (Template:Conventions_navigation), not sure about the second
21:10:32 <robla> quiddity: I agree with your mergism tendencies, but started [[Programming languages]] because none of the existing editable pages really answered the question that I had
21:11:18 <TimStarling> I mean that robla wants to create one page per programming language and put all projects related to that programming language on the specific page
21:11:22 <quiddity> TimStarling, nod. robla, I think that new page is a really good exxample to have available, as one possible direction to head in. I might end up utilizing it as the location for the large table suggested.
21:12:07 <TimStarling> I think [[Programming languages]] is fine, but I'm less convinced about e.g. [[Ocaml]] (which doesn't exist yet)
21:12:09 <chasemp> as a newby to this convo where is the task or rfc on-wiki, I'm not clear on what the meeting subject means exactly
21:12:14 <SMalyshev> I wonder if that page should be just a category
21:12:20 <quiddity> chasemp, https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T136866
21:12:33 <SMalyshev> i.e. Category:Projects using Python
21:12:40 <robla> TimStarling: I'm actually not sure if we should create new pages, but just noted that we have [[Python]] but not [[Ruby]], and didn't really even have [[PHP]] until recently
21:12:48 <ostriches> I would prefer to having a page or category or something on-wiki. I think the github code base detection is pretty bad tbh.
21:12:59 <SMalyshev> Category:Projects using OCaml etc
21:13:06 <legoktm> I think a table with sections for each language would be a good starting point, and if it becomes unweidly, we can split into separate pages
21:13:09 <ostriches> It's bad with multi-language codebases.
21:13:10 <quiddity> chasemp, but it's tangentially related to the larger questions asked in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T136866#2428055
21:13:18 <ostriches> It's completely off-base on repos mostly made up of submodules
21:13:23 <ostriches> (eg mediawiki/extensions)
21:13:46 <Scott_WUaS> If there was something on this page, for example - https://www.whatcanidoforwikimedia.org/ - about newcomer developers participating in this ArchCom process, in these Office Hours, and then something about how to write a RFC in Wikimedia Phabricator, that could work. Might that be possible, Tim?
21:14:10 <chasemp> quiddity: ok thank you I was thinking it was aimed at a list of official languages rather than a survey, makes sense
21:14:51 <ostriches> Is throwing new developers straight into RfC processes a good idea?
21:14:59 <ostriches> Sounds like it'd be information overload.
21:15:16 <robla> ostriches: no, not my hope
21:15:24 <TimStarling> yeah, it's probably not the easiest starting point
21:15:31 <quiddity> ostriches, nod, that was my perspective, too. The subpages for each, contain more details, but are harder to discern. (e.g. the multicolour line at the top of https://github.com/wikimedia/apps-android-wikipedia which shows "Python 1.1%")
21:15:40 <bd808> Scott_WUaS: maybe you are looking for https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker ?
21:15:44 <TimStarling> we could definitely improve that page though, you know it links to a phab query that includes closed bugs
21:16:31 <TimStarling> yeah maybe www.whatcanidoforwikimedia.org can link to [[How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker]]
21:16:47 <Krenair> are we thinking of another microsite here? :/
21:17:20 <ostriches> quiddity: Yeah that's not bad, but stuff like https://github.com/search?l=Python&q=org%3Awikimedia+&type=Repositories is useless.
21:17:29 <ostriches> (again: mw/extensions is not python lol)
21:17:40 <quiddity> Krenair, definitely not! I'm hoping that we conclude that I should focus on improving only mediawiki.org pages. But, I'm willing to also take a stab at improving openhub/github links/listings, I can figure out how.
21:17:42 <legoktm> Krenair: no, I don't think so
21:17:51 <quiddity> I/we*
21:18:15 <ostriches> quiddity: How do you propose improving what github spits out?
21:18:48 <Scott_WUaS> bd808: Thanks, having donated WUaS to Wikidata, I think it's contributing to WMF by developing in both Wikidata and MediaWiki that I'd be interested in learning about, possibly with Phabricator and RFCs after a few months of Office Hours, and from here - https://www.whatcanidoforwikimedia.org/
21:18:54 <quiddity> ostriches, I know I can improve the openhub listings (as Nemo suggested). I'm not sure about github.
21:19:01 <ostriches> :)
21:19:07 <TimStarling> robla: is this only about recruitment at the moment, or do you think this process of documenting how programming languages are used would help with a future discussion about what programming languages we should use for new projects?
21:20:00 <robla> TimStarling: good question. I'm happy to get into the deeper question if quiddity and everyone else wants to
21:20:24 <legoktm> so I think the first step would be taking the list at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Upstream_projects#Invented_Here and others and sorting them by programming languages into a table or something?
21:20:31 <quiddity> I'm satisfied (thanks!) with the feedback and input on my concern. Feel free to go deeper.
21:20:31 <legoktm> and then we'd figure out how we want to present that data to new users?
21:21:36 <legoktm> or am I misunderstanding?
21:21:41 <SMalyshev> I see there's a lot not listed in Invented_Here... is there some procedure to keep it up to date? Or at least telling people it exists (I had no idea)?
21:21:55 <quiddity> legoktm, nod, I'll start a couple of demonstration tables (sometime over the next couple weeks) and ask for further feedback in the task (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T136866)
21:22:06 <robla> legoktm: this is the first time I've looked at that page in this context. interesting idea...
21:22:28 * robla can't remember if he's ever looked at that page
21:22:36 <legoktm> quiddity: sounds good :)
21:22:44 <ostriches> [[Upstream projects]] wouldn't have clued me in that there's a list of our own projects on it
21:22:46 <ostriches> :)
21:22:53 <legoktm> SMalyshev: nope, like most of our docs it's always out of date
21:22:57 <Scott_WUaS> (TimStarling, RobLa and bd808: And perhaps how developing in both Wikidata and MediaWiki would work programming language-wise and from here - www.whatcanidoforwikimedia.org and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/ - could be a way in).
21:23:06 <SMalyshev> yeah, it's like on Windows you click on Start to shutdown :)
21:23:26 <quiddity> that Upstream page, and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developers/Maintainers, are interestingly tangential. I'd love to combine ALL THE THINGS into a giant table, but we'd need monitors 3x wider. >.>
21:24:04 <SMalyshev> legoktm: that's why I think using something like categories may be more resistant to neglect...
21:24:51 * robla agrees with SMalyshev that we need to think about neglect-resistant solutions
21:25:01 <legoktm> maybe!
21:26:34 <greg-g> quiddity: 4 dimensional tables ;)
21:27:07 <SMalyshev> let's put all those projects on Wikidata and just query it :)
21:27:18 <Scott_WUaS> :)
21:27:31 <greg-g> in a previous life I would have said SMW ;)
21:27:44 <quiddity> Maybe I'll also take a look at our existing navboxes, and see which could be best utilized on Upstream and Developers/Maintainers.
21:27:53 <robla> DanielK_WMDE: I'm guessing SMalyshev is only half kidding :-)
21:28:05 <SMalyshev> robla: you are guessing right :)
21:28:24 <Scott_WUaS> RobLa: Wikidata-centrism makes much sense :)
21:30:14 * robla goes back to T136866 to see what questions we should try to resolve
21:30:53 <Scott_WUaS> To add to Quiddity's observation from yesterday: "So, let's focus tomorrow's conversation on helping newcomers identify "What can I work on in language foo"" I'd explore how and in what programming langauges ... and especially in Wikidata
21:31:08 <SMalyshev> continuing with the topic of crazy ideas, Wikibase install doesn't have to be Wikidata... just saying...
21:31:37 <Scott_WUaS> and in Wikidata's process (Wikidata is holding an office hour tomorrow too)
21:33:32 <robla> so....if some developer (WMF included) wanted to deploy an extension involving non-PHP code, what would they need to consider?
21:33:56 <Krenair> well we already have JS
21:34:34 <robla> Krenair: sure...so....let's talk about server languages, say a new Node.js service
21:34:43 <Krenair> wouldn't be mediawiki and wouldn't be an extension
21:34:48 <bd808> robla: an extension? That pretty much by definition needs to be PHP
21:35:01 <SMalyshev> yeah mediawiki extension == PHP/JS
21:35:09 <SMalyshev> but service can be pretty much anything
21:35:13 <TimStarling> we have some extensions that shell out, or are clients for HTTP services
21:35:31 <SMalyshev> we have nodejs, python, java, probably c[++] too
21:35:31 <Krenair> yeah we have OpenStackManager
21:35:35 * Krenair runs
21:36:03 <bd808> the deploy part is the key probably in robla's question
21:36:14 <robla> bd808: yup
21:36:17 <Krenair> setting up the service itself is ops' area
21:36:19 <SMalyshev> I think we only have standard deploy for nodejs
21:36:36 <Krenair> the MW extension part in JS/PHP would have to conform to all the usual requirements
21:36:48 <SMalyshev> all others are pretty much "do your own puppet/scap3"
21:36:48 <bd808> deploying to WMF prod requires at some point getting approval from releng and techops
21:36:59 <quiddity> hypothetical for discussion: a new labs service written in an Esolang. (e.g. BrainFNORD)
21:37:17 <MaxSem> quiddity, E_GOODFORTHEM
21:37:21 <TimStarling> for node.js we also have service-runner, which is the in house service framework
21:37:23 <SMalyshev> but the question is: how many volunterrs would be writing non-toollabs services?
21:37:50 <Krenair> not many I'd imagine, most volunteers I've seen writing code stick to their gadgets and labs tools
21:38:12 <SMalyshev> right. Or patching existing ones (like pywikibot)
21:38:24 <robla> is that by design?
21:38:35 <Krenair> pywikibot is a python bot framework, rather than a service, right?
21:38:49 <bd808> getting completely new code into production is a non-trivial process but for good reasons I think
21:38:50 <Krenair> robla, no I think most useful tools are supposed to graduate from labs eventually, theoretically
21:38:58 <SMalyshev> given how many stakeholders one needs to gather to approve/deploy new service, I'd say it's both design and de facto
21:39:08 <TimStarling> even getting a new PHP extension deployed on WMF is non-trivial
21:39:25 <bd808> true
21:39:50 <bd808> which leads to kitchen-sink extensions like mobilefrontend
21:40:52 <SMalyshev> Krenair: right, but that eventually leads to bots which are kind of services...
21:41:02 <bd808> from my personal experience the 2 big hurdles were security review and puppet automation
21:42:15 <Krenair> because it's easier to put extra features into an existing extension with far less approval than it takes to deploy a new extension?
21:42:18 <SMalyshev> yeah I think with puppets we don't have much choice besides a) learn puppet or b) bribe somebody who knows puppet
21:42:19 <bd808> both really due to limited revewer resources.
21:42:40 <bd808> Krenair: yes. there is no second or third or fourth security review
21:42:51 <legoktm> it sucks, but I can say from experience that it sucks much less than it did 3 years ago
21:43:05 <Krenair> Is it a problem of getting puppet code written, or getting into onto the actual production puppetmasters?
21:43:30 <bd808> for my puppet is was getting it reviewed and merged
21:43:45 <Krenair> SMalyshev, you're probably right wrt stakeholders btw, I was thinking from the labs perspective
21:44:15 <TimStarling> it's not simple to test puppet manifests
21:44:29 <TimStarling> I think the ops team usually deploys them untested (except for a lint check)
21:44:56 <TimStarling> so to make sure things work, they are limited to staring at the code really hard
21:45:01 <SMalyshev> TimStarling: yeah that too. even if your build own puppetmaster (non-trivial) still labs and prod differ a lot
21:46:33 <TimStarling> they said to me "you can build your own puppetmaster" and I said "where is the puppetmaster *you* use to test your changes? can I use that one?"
21:46:44 <TimStarling> and it transpired that there wasn't one
21:47:04 <bd808> heh
21:47:31 <bd808> I've tried to talk folks into testing in deployment-prep more often but... yeah
21:47:51 * robla looks at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Puppet and gets sad
21:48:51 <SMalyshev> robla: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Puppet probably :)
21:48:55 <quiddity> it was empty, and is ripe for redirecting.
21:49:26 <SMalyshev> looks like still ripe for redirecting to wikitech :)
21:49:42 <quiddity> done
21:49:50 <bd808> robla: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Puppet
21:50:04 <bd808> and https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Puppet_coding
21:50:49 <bd808> knowing what goes on mw.o and what goes on wikitech and what goes on meta is still a challenge for me
21:51:14 <Krenair> mediawiki.org only if it's mediawiki code
21:51:20 <Krenair> meta probably not for technical things
21:51:29 <robla> bd808: I'm guessing it's a challenger for any newcomer to our codebase
21:51:30 <Krenair> wikitech for pretty much anything wikimedia-related that's technical
21:51:59 <bd808> Krenair: but mw.o has all of the WMF teams and projects which could be anything
21:52:09 <Krenair> bd808, yes but should mw.o have all of that?
21:52:24 <quiddity> Krenair, yes, but that only works if one doesn't mind the SUL issue (notmywiki gets even worse when people have to create a new account just to contribute)
21:52:24 <bd808> and there are quire a few technical things on meta like quarry docs
21:52:32 <TimStarling> for a lot of projects I have written a page on each wiki
21:52:43 <Krenair> those things need to be tagged for moving off of mediawiki.org but I've never got around to it
21:52:43 <TimStarling> they have a different audience
21:53:15 <TimStarling> for mw.org I write for external users, basically public-facing source code documentation
21:53:26 <TimStarling> for wikitech I write notes for the ops team
21:53:26 <Krenair> quiddity, if we're talking about people that want to contribute to our software they should probably have gerrit access, and this requires them to have a wikitech account
21:54:11 <quiddity> contributions can be in the form of user-feedback, and other non-technical guises! ;-)
21:54:35 <bd808> someday wikitech will be a SUL wiki
21:54:49 <bd808> gibe me another 9-12 months
21:55:45 <robla> this has been a really great conversation, thanks everyone! Lemme look up the link to the thing we'll be suggesting for next week....
21:55:58 <Scott_WUaS> Thanks, All!
21:57:10 <robla> next week's Phab event is https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/E228 and https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T589 is what we're tentatively planning on
21:58:42 <Krenair> I dunno, was it useful to other people? I feel like I've mostly been talking about problems with our existing situation
21:58:47 <Krenair> Maybe that's useful, maybe not
21:59:11 <robla> Krenair: it was very useful to me to know what edits to make to mediawiki.org, so I appreciated it
22:00:36 <robla> thanks TimStarling for chairing/meetbot running :-)
22:00:50 <TimStarling> #endmeeting
Content licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike (CC BY-SA) 4.0 unless otherwise noted; code licensed under GNU General Public License (GPL) 2.0 or later and other open source licenses. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Code of Conduct. · Wikimedia Foundation · Privacy Policy · Code of Conduct · Terms of Use · Disclaimer · CC-BY-SA · GPL · Credits