Page MenuHomePhabricator

Remove unused configuration $wgVectorResponsive
Open, Needs TriagePublic

Description

[[ https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/g/operations/mediawiki-config/+/a816755e12f793573a0da39d70990d7e068f35d0/wmf-config/InitialiseSettings.php#7825 | $wgVectorResponsive is only enabled on testwiki ]] and doesn't appear to be used elsewhere. As the configuration was introduced about four years ago, it seems unlikely to suddenly become popular and is most probably a good candidate for removal.

Acceptance criteria

  • All $wgVectorResponsive references from Vector are removed.
  • All related and now unused code and resources in Vector are removed.
  • All $wgVectorResponsive references from mediawiki-config are removed.

QA

Event Timeline

Restricted Application added a subscriber: Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptJan 14 2020, 5:26 PM
Izno added a subscriber: Izno.

Probably shouldn't do this...

I believe this configuration is used in 3rd party wikis. Perhaps Izno can provide specific examples or further details?

Izno added a subscriber: Isarra.Jan 14 2020, 11:59 PM

I don't know. It just seems bizarre that something we wanted 4 years ago apparently is no longer wanted, and no circumstances related to the original work have changed. :) I would expect that as part of the Vector rework we'll get to a responsive mode again, but maybe that's not an explicit requirement of that work? (I am fairly certain that is an objective/requirement.)

I believe the reason it was enabled only on beta was because people were requested to try it out, not because it wasn't ready for full deployment or another. It probably should have been deployed then in some fashion or another. Maybe @Isarra knows different.

It seems only slightly weird to me to not cc the people who were actively involved in creating and merging this feature (@Harej, the original author of the CSS code, me, who did some cleanup and integration, and @Legoktm, who merged the original patch and @TheDJ who further improved the original code) when you're talking about killing off a useful feature...

Now then...the whole configuration global exists because @Jdlrobson figured that some people would dislike the change for various reasons. The rationale for that made sense at the time, and to some extent, still does; though I feel that having an important feature such as responsiveness default to false is wrong, and should WMF wikis not want the feature, for whatever reasons, it could and should default to false only on WMF wikis and canonically default to true in skin.json.

That being said, on ShoutWiki this global has been enabled since day one and continues to be enabled, there being over 3,800 wikis that use Vector as their default skin. I'm not telling you how to implement responsiveness, but I am certainly vouching for the importance of responsiveness in general; it doesn't matter how it's implemented, as long as it is there. Mobile is a big deal and its importance is unlikely to diminish in the near future, so in that context, it seems silly that we are even discussing the subject of "should we remove responsiveness from a popular skin".

What ashley said.

Unless the plan is to replace it with a new implementation that better meets the same use cases before the next major release, removing a used feature with no cited specific issues is generally poor practice. Whether or not the WMF specifically uses this isn't particularly relevant.

As @ashley points out this is used by third parties and it also is enabled on the mobile domain of Wikimedia wikis (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spain?useskin=vector).

On hindsight, given what happened with "responsive Monobook" (and related conversations e.g. T196721) and in the end it became an opt out user preference - I still think the flag was a good idea. I would like to see it improved and folded into the default experience or removed once a new version of Vector exists.

That said, I think any decision to remove it should involve an RFC around the future of the flag to respect the people that did work on this and check we're all on the same page.

TheDJ removed a subscriber: TheDJ.Wed, Jan 29, 11:29 PM
Harej removed a subscriber: Harej.Tue, Feb 11, 1:16 AM