In T234634#5578955, @josephine_l wrote:

Hey all, we are still looking for session leaders in order for this session to go ahead. :) Would anyone like to take it up? @Tgr @Addshore @Quiddity ?

Message drafted, translated, and delivered to the Global message delivery, with nuances in T233929: Identify and reach out to potential test wikis
Message: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Outreach

Initial outreach to see if some specific wikis are interested, is being done via an addition paragraph in the massmessage outreach.
The bolded section in this message https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Reading/Web/Desktop_Improvements/Outreach
is being delivered to the wikis in this list https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Quiddity_(WMF)/Global_message_delivery_split_3
These wikis were chosen based on prior interest in this project or related projects, or uniquely relevant features at those wikis.
Further outreach will be done based on the initial responses here.

In T18691#5574534, @Pigsonthewing wrote:

If the page is long, a reader would have to scroll all the way to the top to copy the link and remember the name of the section they wanted to share.

A radical proposal: Instead of a "share" link, have a "TOC" link that links to the relvant line in the TOC (rather like links from citations to where the citation lies in the body text).

In T234957#5571404, @Tgr wrote:

Would it be useful to create some sort of inventory of gadgets (not necessarily names/URLs of the most used/important user scripts, but possibly an inventory of functionalities and workflows that editors use gadgets for)?

Very useful, and not primarily for interaction with MediaWiki changes (although that's useful as well). The increased discoverability of gadgets used by other communities would be a huge boon in itself.

Thoughts (with obligatory "i am not a dev" disclaimer, and a "sorry for the linkdump, this probably belongs elsewhere, but since you asked..." apology):

• The Documentation tag's workboard has benefited from a recent major sorting effort by @srodlund (ty!). Other people assisting with that, regularly, and thus also becoming familiar with the individual tasks in the backlogs and offering input on them (or pointing other people towards them), would be great.
• High-level on-wiki documentation overviews: There are various ongoing and past efforts to create hubs - organized overviews of the most fundamental/important pages. More people assisting with those would be great (give ideas, ask questions, give feedback, etc).
  • Existing wikipage efforts
    • The mainpage at mw.o was overhauled recently. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki
    • The developer hub is important and could always use more eyeballs/watchlisters/editors. https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_hub
    • The page https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker is the 3rd crucial hub, one that most newcomers are directed towards.
    • All would benefit from improvements to all the pages they link to.
  • Ongoing/future/historic wikipage efforts
    • The six "User pages" links at the bottom of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:APaskulin_(WMF) are among the most useful/relevant.
    • The ongoing GSoD work of https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Pavithraes/Sandbox/ is also very important
    • I made a list a couple of years ago at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Quiddity_(WMF)/Hubs_and_docs which might be useful
• Individual wikipages:
  • It can be hard for a user to determine how uptodate a page is.
  • It might help if we create & standardize a way we indicate a doc-page's quality and importance?
    • Currently we just use these generic cleanup templates: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Documentation/Style_guide/templates
    • Perhaps we want to use some sort of scoring-system, like the Wikipedia's sometimes use "stub/start/c/b/a/good/featured" (quality) and "top/high/mid/low" (importance) type ratings?
    • See also https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Pavithraes/Sandbox/Technical_documentation_prioritization
• Off-wiki and Cross-wiki docs and tools:
  • Self-documenting code, annotated source-code, docs.wikimedia.org, etc - I don't know anything about these.
  • Wikitech vs Mediawiki - this is always complicated, due to the historical/idealistic split of wiki-roles. Nothing that can be done, for now. Wikitech should be SUL eventually, which will improve things a bit.
  • I keep a list of seemingly-important links & subdomains at https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Quiddity#Bookmarks (which might be relevant here. I regularly forget what they're all for!)
• Other:
  • There's probably still some good ideas worth more discussion/effort at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Developer_Wishlist/2017/Documentation
  • This group was recently renamed/rebooted/opened-up, and everyone should watchlist it (for now. More info/outreach soon): https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_technical_documentation:_friends_of_the_docs
    • There's a listing of external "good docs examples" reference material that anyone can add to at (the group's old name) https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Technical_Document_Re-working_Group/Resources
• Support channels:
  • Complicated, because different methods/platforms are best suited to (A) different types of questions, (B) different archetypes of users. Plus (C) the people with the knowledge to answer a question might not be in (nor want to be in) the chosen platform. E.g. An inexperienced newcomer who is slowly learning how a code-review system works, needs different support from an experienced newcomer who needs to understand how our platforms relate to what they learned elsewhere. -- The platforms themselves (Onwiki/Discourse discussion; VS Mailing-list discussion; VS IRC/Telegram/Zulip discussion) each have different pros/cons, too, such as searchability, filterability (the usual cause of channel-fragmentation or an individual just leaving a channel, is trying improve the signal-to-noise ratio for themselves), difficulty of joining-in, and speed-of-average-response.
• Conference idea:
  • Perhaps discussing the specific types of documentation that we're most in need of (improving or creating), would be helpful?
    • See TLDR of the types at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Documentation/Style_guide#Deciding_on_a_document_type
    • and a list of accurate & distinct terminology (with examples) at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Pavithraes/Sandbox/Technical_documentation_templates_and_suggestions#Tips_for_writing_in_genres

Hopefully something in there helps, and doesn't just distract/tangent! Sorry again. >.>

Onboarding thoughts (with obligatory "i am not a dev" disclaimer):

• Primary existing pages:
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/New_Developers
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_contribute (also lists the non-development-related areas)
• Personas: Overall, I think we need to constantly keep in mind the various demographics/target-audiences, because their needs often wildly differ from each other, with some overlap.
  • E.g. new gadget-authors -- vs -- new SRE staff -- vs -- new external-researchers -- vs -- new external wikidata collaborators
  • Past attempts at defining them include:
    • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:APaskulin_(WMF)/Docs_Personas
    • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Cloud_Services_team/Our_audiences
    • https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Growth_and_diversity_of_Technology_team_audiences#Results
    • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Product_Development/Person%C3%A6#Technical_contributors_and_software_or_content_re-users
    • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Web_APIs_hub#Personas
• Existing per-person onboarding docs examples: There are (some quite old) examples from various WMF Product/Tech dept teams. Similar to the gitlab template linked by TheDJ above. E.g.
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Cloud_Services_team/Onboarding_Hieu
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Release_Engineering_Team/Onboarding (e.g. T214556: Onboarding Brennen)
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Discovery/Team/Onboarding
  • https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Team_Practices_Group/Onboarding (historic)
• Collecting more info (pre-TechConf?):
  • I think it would be useful for other groups/affiliates/teams to share what they currently use (e.g. WMDE?)
  • It might be useful for any recent newcomers to the movement to explain what pain points they remember being specifically confused/frustrated by. (ideally right here, and before TechConf!)

Might this be related to T235027: Translate does not update content page when saving units ?

I agree that we need a different interface option for galleries where there are dozens of images in the slideshow.

Done. Thanks for the reminder, and for making it work. :)

In T224681#5523545, @Elitre wrote:

In T224681#5522742, @Aklapper wrote:

@JLetangWMF: https://wikimedia.org.au/wiki/Calendar seems to use the Cargo extension.
That extension is not deployed on Wikimedia servers so it would have to go through a review.

What about https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Calendar ?

@Pchelolo @EvanProdromou How complicated would it be to implement the aforementioned (T232379#5480718) deduplication feature, and is that within your team's area of responsibility?
These bugs are making the MassMessage system as a whole completely unreliable, and it's one of the main systems for cross-wiki communication for a multitude of groups.
Thanks!

In T232379#5497392, @Johan wrote:

Have we seen any arguments against a new deduplication flag so far?

Done x3.

I've asked on m:Talk:MassMessage and wikitech-ambassadors@.

Right. Yup. Sorry, I didn't mean that exact phrasing, but was typing out quickly during the meeting. The intent was more... somehow provide the usernames that people can potentially ping, perhaps giving specific circumstances/specializations. E.g. "Ping andre__ for questions about [...]". -- However, your idea would work as well, just in a slightly more fragmented way. :-)

Group thoughts: probably #wikimedia-tech, and update the team page to specify that "You can find us on IRC at [...] and you should ping (just type) these nicknames to get our attention if we're working at that time: andre__ srish_aka_tux srrodlund" (so that we don't need to alter the channel topic)

In T232379#5480718, @Pchelolo wrote:

[...]
Seems like we need a new deduplication flag, like deduplicate_unique that would make it ignore exactly the same job regardless of the timing. This, however, will make it impossible to send exactly the same message to the user.

Adding @Pchelolo and @Ottomata per T232362 -- But there's the quirk in this task, of MassMessage sending 3 copies of the message in some instances, hence it might need separate investigation/solution? Pinging whilst the related aspects are still fresh in your heads. Thanks! :)

Note, there are already these 3 compendiums. It might be good to update 1 of them, instead of creating a 4th, although possibly that's what is meant by "create a page". :)
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Help:Cloud_VPS
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Cloud_VPS
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Portal:Cloud_VPS/Admin

Re: non-delivery - AFAICT this problem is not the "readonly" bug, because the local logs don't contain any of those errors, e.g. https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Istimewa:Catatan/massmessage

@Daimona Please could you suggest an appropriate way to phrase this in Tech News? Ideally a 1 (or 2) sentence description that is easily translatable. Thanks!

I've copied the etherpad into https://wikimania.wikimedia.org/wiki/2019:Hackathon/Outcomes

There's also a gadget at Frwiki: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Gadget-ShortenUrl.js
Which can be added to your global.js with

// ShortURL in the 'Tools' sections of sidebar
mw.loader.load('https://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-ShortenUrl.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');

Ok, thanks. :)

Very good specific points, thank you for that information. With that in mind, and especially the missing 2FA, I suppose this proposal might be declinable.

Thanks, Herald! That was the one I wanted.

Thanks x2! (link to end result: https://tools.wmflabs.org/global-search/ )

1. Please update the documentation page at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:New_filters_for_edit_review/Advanced_filters to cover this new feature.
2. How would you like the Tech News item to be phrased? I'm guessing something like:

The advanced version of the edit review pages (Recent Changes, Watchlist, and Related Changes) now include two new filters. These filters are for "All contents" and "All discussions" and will filter the view to just those namespaces, however they do not include pseudo talk pages such as discussions that are in the Project: namespace.

Please edit that, or write whatever you'd like it to say, including the link to the docs page (once updated). (All within the next ~20 hours, before the hard freeze for Tech News translations.)
Thanks!

@Rammanojpotla too! (Sorry I missed you initially)

@srishakatux @Tuxology Please see this task.
Note: this code might help: https://github.com/toolforge/fontcdn/

I think this task is resolved now? Afaict the cleanup was done (per T179183#3716725 above), and the original bot no longer needs a new maintainer (because it has been turned off or is just inactive, per contribs).

Thanks all, and happy 17th birthday to Estonian Wikipedia!

Related policy now exists at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Privilege_policy (per recent email)

Hesitantly resolving. Re-open if you want to work on it.