Good points! Thanks for that. Yeah, everything has pros/cons, and all people have personal subjective weighting of each of those pros/cons. I guess leaving it up to the topic leaders for each, is the most pragmatic. :/
Thu, Jan 18
I'd prefer if we use an etherpad for this because that lets participants and remotees participate ahead of the meeting
Each session has some standard structure in the task description, which is intended to encourage exactly this kind of pre-event participation. However, we're encouraging people to discuss the topics in phabricator ahead of time (instead of etherpad), I think primarily because that generates email/notifications, which thus reminds everyone to see the latest update(s). Ideally, the topic leaders will collate and summarize the feedback received within the phab comments, before (or at the start of) their sessions. I did add etherpad links to all the sessions yesterday, but primarily so that they'd be ready for live notetaking on the day. The one you already commented on has been merged with the default placeholder bits. https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/wm-dev-summit-2018-supporting-3rd-party but it might be good to raise those thoughts in the phab comments, too. :-)
Just as a datapoint: I cannot reproduce this, in latest Firefox or Chrome under Linux. Successfully signed up for wikimedia-california@ in both.
Wed, Jan 17
Tue, Jan 16
Sat, Jan 13
Fri, Jan 12
Thu, Jan 11
Wed, Jan 10
Tue, Jan 9
Mon, Jan 8
Sat, Jan 6
I think this is resolved? I tried signing up with a new account at Arwiki and got a welcome message from a bot-account that uses the settings detailed for this extension, and it triggered the small yellow "new message" string.
I’m a blind twitter user. There are a lot of us out there. Increase your ability to reach us and help us interact with your pictures, it’s really simple and makes a huge difference to our twitter experiance allowing us to see your images our way. Thanks for the description
Fri, Jan 5
Tue, Jan 2
Mon, Jan 1
Fri, Dec 29
Sat, Dec 23
Fri, Dec 22
Dec 21 2017
Dec 20 2017
Dec 19 2017
Dec 18 2017
Dec 16 2017
The Commons "category renaming discussion" is still open, and might take awhile to resolve. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Categories_for_discussion/2017/09/Category:Wikimedia_Labs
Dec 15 2017
.. and so on .. (enwiki's interwiki map has lots and lots ... floralwiki, flickr, gentoo, hackerspace, dreamhost (!), doomwiki, .. etc.) See https://github.com/wikimedia/parsoid/blob/master/lib/config/baseconfig/enwiki.json#L2072-L5898
IIUC, that list is global, not specific to Enwiki, per https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:Interwiki - (I assume the name of that .json file, or the inclusion of that list in that file, is a historic artifact, or something similarly/more complicated! Or it replicates a global file, or something.)
Dec 13 2017
Some semi-related notes at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Just_make_it_a_user_preference (feel free to retitle that page!)
Dec 12 2017
source: the html-source of https://tools.wmflabs.org/hay/directory/ which includes the raw json behind it, and some simple search&replace and sorting.
Dec 11 2017
Dec 10 2017
Dec 8 2017
Dec 6 2017
Yes, emphatically, to what MattFitzpatrick wrote. I was part of the successful 2005 Enwiki main page redesign, and I've tried to help almost all the subsequent attempts to avoid the problems we ran into in every iteration since. -- TLDR: Do not mix together the many aspects of change, if at all possible - I.e. (1) backend decisions (tables vs CSS), should be addressed separately from (2) which content blocks are shown, and (3) what order they are shown in, and (4) using what aesthetics of design. -- I might be able to answer other specific questions, but there really are some stressful memories in there (for us collectively, and personally).
I agree with Matt that Enwiki is perfectly amenable to changing from tables to CSS, just don't change anything else at the same time.
If memory serves, there was a related design in the 2012 attempt at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Br'er_Rabbit/sandbox.css and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:2012_main_page_redesign_proposal/Br'er_Rabbit (deleted by user-request because of his frustration, but admins might be able to rescue the perfectly valid code) that merely changed tables to CSS.
Also I vaguely recall the 2016 attempt started off as just a table-replacement, but then veered off into "whilst we're changing things...." territory. Possibly there are older diffs at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Main_Page_(2016_redesign)?withCSS=MediaWiki:User:Main_Page/NewMainPage.css worth using.
+1 to good idea but new task. It's good to keep things clearly separated (in both discussion and patchset), where possible/practical.
Dec 5 2017
Ok. I'll file a task to delete the tool (as a placeholder for now, as there isn't a process for that yet).
Dec 1 2017
Nov 30 2017
+1 to the comments above about (1) the editing/pen icons not being clear anymore, and (2) the advanced-settings icon (was sliders, now a cog) needing further thought.