Now we have:

In T418167#11895319, @Lydia_Pintscher wrote:

There are plans to make them queryable.

@Lydia_Pintscher do you know?

@Pfps Source code finder: https://codesearch.wmcloud.org/search/?q=WikibaseQualityConstraints&i=fosho#Extension:WikibaseQualityConstraints

+1

Slides: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_LEADS_-_Wikimedia_Hackathon_2026.pdf

Notes from https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/2026-wikibase-bootstrap-hackathon

Another hackathon spin-off: T423246

As user feedback, to me CLI features are high priority for automating installs (using cloud-init or analog) and, as much as possible, to reduce the need of handmade preconfigurations as I'm doing at the moment. The good thing is I can create a WB server from zero to >400 properties in about two hours.

Another hackathon spin-off: T421220.

Should the investigation also take into account the «slot» concept?

In T201150#11645113, @Pfps wrote:

Given that KrBot is a third-party closed-source (?) tool, I would be happy having it replaced.

I've been thinking lately about the possibility of ingesting unmodified OWL files into blank WB instances while configuring restrictions using Extension:WikibaseQualityConstraints. I never tried, but I guess we could extend the wikibase-bootstrap-extended.ttl set to include all the entities required for QC be operative. I'm adopting the workflow of working with upstream unmodified OWL files in the development of #crm4wb[1]. In my head sounds like a good way to attract classic LOD users into Wikibase.

In T420597#11728915, @Superraptor123 wrote:

It might be worth having someone from WESO (https://www.weso.es/) look over the formalisms? Food for thought!

Now we are reviewing the set OWL formalism here: T420597.

An spin-off the hackathon: T420597.

Nothing relevant after the hackathon to add here.

@Sukkoria It would be interesting to see a demo in Arnhem.

@Spinster I have interest in that data model for independent Wikibase Suite instances too. See you in Arnhem :-)

Not sute if it's relevant to add here this report from https://ru.wikinews.org.

At this point I think the bootstrap can be considered stable and the extension on open development.

IMHO, this parity should apply to WBS too. CC: @Leif_WMDE

Sorry my ignorance but, what's the difference between Wikibase Suite and Wikibase Deploy?

Another point related in my point of view. Now we have a set of minimal properties ready to be imported in a empty WB with the needed tools. See wikibase-bootstrap and T391815.

I don't know what approach are you working in but lately I'm thinking probably we need to use a different repo than https://github.com/wmde/wikibase-release-pipeline for just the current «deploy» content since AFAIK there is no need for the immense amount of users for the pipeline code. Probably this change will have minor impact but would reduce the complexity a bit. Also, naming, neither «wikibase-release-pipeline» or «deploy» are meaningful. So, this new repo would have a better naming as «wikibase-suite-something» or similar.

In T416447#11582106, @Deepesha_WMDE wrote:

Work in progress is now in the deploy@5.0.1-olea branch.

Excellent! Do you know if it's able to work with WBS in a LAN install? I remember v2 can't.

Could you please share some information about your evaluation?

Thanks!

In T410504#11394189, @A_smart_kitten wrote:

Fixed here. It was a trivial fix. Sorry @Danielyepezgarces for bothering you with this 🤦‍♂️

In T410504#11388123, @Aklapper wrote:

Fixed by @Danielyepezgarces with this pull request.

There are being interesting results as you can check at T363820. Now I'm closing this ticket.