|Resolved||ppelberg||T54448 Transclusion dialog should not suggest documentation sub pages as templates|
|Resolved||Krinkle||T52512 TemplateData: Page properties should not be stored twice (both Template and Template/doc)|
|Open||None||T56140 Move TemplateData to its own JSON-content namespace and associate with Template-namespace, or to its own TemplateData content model and revision slot|
|Open||None||T39865 Add ability to bind pages together|
|Open||None||T35298 Option to disable some or all talk namespaces|
|Open||None||T53849 Add native support for "Template documentation:" namespace|
|Open||None||T487 RfC: Associated namespaces|
- Mentioned In
- T226667: Register namespaces in the database
T165149: Drop requirement to define a talk namespace for every subject namespace
T153995: Cannot add categories to Commons Datasets
T148734: Moving associated content out of the wikitext
T121731: Investigation: Assistance with structured data on Commons
E187: RFC Meeting: triage meeting (2016-05-25, #wikimedia-office)
T125222: Support a given subpage as the "official" documentation subpage for templates, to avoid duplicate TemplateData
T56140: Move TemplateData to its own JSON-content namespace and associate with Template-namespace, or to its own TemplateData content model and revision slot
T35298: Option to disable some or all talk namespaces
T100157: Better filtering by namespace support
T95737: Allow talk pages for each edit filter
- Mentioned Here
- T107595: [RFC] Multi-Content Revisions
The Architecture Committee has decided to pick up this RFC, and see whether we can get it approved over the next days or weeks. We are currently experimenting with the RFC process, trying to adopt it to a Phabricator based workflow. It is no longer necessary for every RFC to be discussed on IRC, and decided ad-hoc.
Over the next days, I will try to assess the status of your proposal. You could help me by answering a few questions:
- Do you still want to go forward with this RFC?
- Do you have the capacity to work on the implementation of this RFC in the next weeks and months?
- What are the most important questions you need to have answered (from the ArchCom or others)?
From the RFC page on the wiki, it seems like there has been a lot of discussions, and a lot of ideas. I'm having trouble to discern a clear proposal. Could you write down which next steps you propose, in a condensed form? You could do that on here on Phab, or on the wiki (and then post a pointer here).
Ok, marking this as stalled for now. If anyone wants to work on this, please update the RFC and move it to "inbox" or "under discussion" on the rfc board https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/mediawiki-rfcs/