|Open||None||T167020 Point support URL for Commons android app to GitHub|
|Open||None||T253116 Support support URL configuration per project|
- Mentioned In
- T166957: [[Wikimedia:Commons-android-strings-nearby info menu wikidata article/es]] i18n issue
- Mentioned Here
- D831: Hide the LDAP login form by default, click to show
T963: Make the phabricator OAuth login UI more prominent
T166957: [[Wikimedia:Commons-android-strings-nearby info menu wikidata article/es]] i18n issue
Currently not supported by Translate: all Wikimedia projects (as defined by the namespace) are expected to use the same issue tracker, and I believe this is the only exception. It would be easier for the Commons Android app to resume using Phabricator, but we'll see. :)
Sorry, yes, we use GitHub for our issue tracking. We have never used Phabricator, AFAIK, except when it was absolutely required by the Outreachy program that I interned in, and even then we only created Phab issues for the specific features I was developing as part of the internship - the bulk of the issues remained on GitHub.
If I recall correctly, we discussed this at some point, and there were several benefits to using GitHub that were mentioned:
- Better chances of recruiting new open source contributors who have never contributed to a Wikimedia project before
- Better integration with pull requests
That was a while ago though, so it may be worth re-discussing it? @Nicolas_Raoul
Personally I much prefer Github for pretty much everything, especially pull requests - I find it much more intuitive and also I am just used to the way it works, and although I think Phabricator has more features it forfeits simplicity for usability, which may scare off prospective new volunteers. Also Android Studio, which almost all developers will be working on, has full integration with Github (in that you can commit and create pull requests directly from it), but no inbuilt support for Phabricator.
As a community-maintained app, we use what we deem to be the most convenient platform, and right now this is Github, by a very large margin.
Also, we have different goals than the WMF, and one of our major goals is to attract new developers who might not have contributed to any open source projects yet (for instance yesterday a developer came out of the blue and made what he says was his first open source contribution ever).
Github helps with this goal: registering is dead simple, you can discover projects by clicking on tags that interest you, in 5 seconds you get a clear idea of what the project is about and how active it is, forking is extremely simple, getting your changes reviewed and merged is intuitive.
WMF uses Phabricator because it is best for their own priorities, which are different from our priorities.
one of our major goals is to attract new developers
Have you considered the need to be welcoming for translators as well? (A genuine question; it's legitimate to answer "we don't care".) We have sometimes trouble getting them to register to Phabricator too. :)
Especially those who have never heard about issue tracking/XML/WMF/etc. (people who only know Wikipedia, Commons, and the Android app, as users)
And don't you think it's easier for such people to login with their Wikipedia/Commons account?
@Nemo_bis Many of our users created their account via the app, and have no idea what MediaWiki is. As a consequence, for them creating a Github account is probably easier than figuring out how log into Phabricator:
On the minus side, with Github they will miss an opportunity to learn what LDAP is.