Page MenuHomePhabricator

Central Code Repository for code used on wikis (Templates, Lua modules, Gadgets)
Closed, DuplicatePublic

Description

There's long been discussion about us setting up a dedicated service (a la commons) that could serve as a centralized repository for code used on the wikis. This is broadly construed to include:

  • Templates
  • Lua modules
  • Gadgets

Some of the proposed benefits to doing this would be:

  • Deduplication of effort
  • Easier to peer review

Scary transclusion was an attempt at this, but really is scary and not usable in its current form.

Event Timeline

demon raised the priority of this task from to Needs Triage.
demon updated the task description. (Show Details)
demon added a project: MediaWiki-Core-Team.
demon moved this task to Backlog on the MediaWiki-Core-Team board.
demon changed Security from none to None.
Aklapper renamed this task from Central Code Repository to Central Code Repository for code used on wikis (Templates, Lua modules, Gadgets).Jan 27 2015, 9:19 PM
Aklapper triaged this task as Low priority.

Adding Developer-Advocacy because the lack of this feature has an impact in the way the communities of templates / modules / gadgets are (des)organized, duplicating plenty of work, and handling a lot of code that has a newer version somewhere.

Is Product-Infrastructure-Team-Backlog considering to have this task as a quarterly goal? If not, how can we help pushing it to higher priority in our backlogs?

"Central Code Repository" sounds like git, and then why not use gerrit/diffusion for review? Then, the gadget, template, Lua module page could transclude a particular revision from the repository, e.g.
{{#git include: |ProveIt_Wikipedia.js |mediawiki/gadgets/proveit-js |wmf/group1}}
(file, project, branch). At that point T91626: Technology to transclude git content into wiki pages might be relevant.

The alternative mentioned in the Global scripts RFC is a shadow namespace using ForeignFileRepos. I don't know how hard it would be to support http access to a git repo as a ForeignAPIRepo.

"Central Code Repository" sounds like git, and then why not use gerrit/diffusion for review?

Techniclly that is correct but note the social aspect here - people who know how to edit wiki pages might not all be keen on learning a system like git... Potential participation/contribution barriers, so to say.

Qgil moved this task to Proposed: July - September 2016 on the Developer-Relations workboard.

This would mean that a team includes this goal in their annual plan FY2016-17. I still wonder to which team would this goal belong, though.