No consensus for https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/phame/blog/ to exist.
See also https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2016-August/086381.html
Description
Description
Related Objects
Related Objects
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
@Nemo_bis Do you have any particular reason to disable them? Are they harmful to anything? Do they cause any issues? Please elaborate... Thanks.
Comment Actions
No arguments given (apart from vague "no consensus" without any explanation where the consensus guidelines are).
Proposing to decline this task.
Comment Actions
Argument is that people are free to use it.
This is not an argument, it's a statement.
Comment Actions
And currently no argument here to disable working infrastructure.
"Never change a running system"
Comment Actions
You seem to be the only person so far requesting to disable it so I'd expect arguments to be provided but so far I have not seen any, and T135689#2308782 has remained unanswered.
Please refrain from reopening this task. You are welcome to provide arguments why people should not be allowed to use existing functionality in our infrastructure that helps them get their work and communication done. If that is not possible, I suggest you spend your time on other topics. Thank you.
Comment Actions
This task could be reopened (and the task summary be potentially adjusted) as there are now actual concerns brought up (which has not been the case so far in this task).
Comment Actions
According to T144338 two teams at Wikimedia have started using phame (blog), I doint know why you want this disabled.
Why do you want it disabled?
Since it is not in the way and plus it allowed teams such as labs to communicate when a labs upgrade happended, ie J10
Any one at Wikimedia is free to use what they want, you doint have to use phame if you don't want to and you can always choose a custom dashbored for your self if you doint want to see blogs on your home page.
Comment Actions
@Aklapper he in https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2016-August/086379.html is referring to T14338 he wasent asking for it to be disabled he just wants to be able to comment unless I'm wrong.
Comment Actions
No, see that email. It says "Apparently there hasn't been much discussion or deliberation about the advantages and disadvantages of this new feature compared to other communication channels", given that https://blog.wikimedia.org/ also exists.
Comment Actions
But https://blog.wikimedia.org/ is not as widly used as phabricator, I never read https://blog.wikimedia.org/ due to the fact it is not easy to find stuff about mw or anything like phabricator related either, whereas it is easy on phabricator because it dosent yet mix anything.
Comment Actions
And that's exactly why to potentially discuss the scope here.
But https://blog.wikimedia.org/ is not as widly used as phabricator
Citation needed. ;)