In T181739#3801212, @Aklapper wrote:

Is there a common definition after which time period a user becomes an "inactive user"?

So, is anyone working on this or what is happening :-) Think it has been sitting here for some time now.

I've got a patch ready for sorting alphabetically if that's what is wanted.

I can start working on making the subscribers list load alphabetically. That would make the most since in my opinion.

I don't think it should be mandatory. There can be times where no summary is not needed.

Okay, then I'm going to close the task. Seems like everything is under control. It takes the time it takes then :-) - I diden't think about the fact that it will be deployed on other wikies. Of course people need to be trusted. My mistake.

But I'm talking about local active +2 reviewers on this extension only? - If we have more local repo maintainers on this extension, then the development can continue without any lack of time, and we will also be able to develop without taking the time of SWAT members that other more important patches to review.

In T179573#3735738, @Reedy wrote:

Many of them, if asked, can/will review the code.

I think you're making an issue out of a problem that doesn't exist

In T179573#3735435, @Reedy wrote:

In T179573#3735433, @SimmeD wrote:

But are they active in this extension?

Why's that really matter? They're active over a lot of different extensions

But are they active in this extension?

In T179573#3732828, @Reedy wrote:

In T179573#3732398, @SimmeD wrote:

@Reedy - There is also two connected with this extension: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/groups/586,members - there are other people in the SWAT group that can as well, but they mostly do stuff like deployment on mediawiki projects.

There's a lot more people than that, due to a variety of inheritance of rights

@Reedy - There is also two connected with this extension: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/admin/groups/586,members - there are other people in the SWAT group that can as well, but they mostly do stuff like deployment on mediawiki projects.

There is T174667 for an example. But it just didn't seems like a lot of +2 reviewers was active. But I might have been to fast.

How long will there go for another +2 user has checked it? - And how many are there with +2.

The 404 page is fixed.

I don't have the power to deploy stuff, on commit.

In T178550#3722928, @Jayprakash12345 wrote:

@SimmeD When you have plan to deploy it?

Makes since that the publishers would be subscribed.

I've tested a lot of things now, and I don't really know why we have set "nl_main_page_id" and "nl_active" to unique? - All the problems will be solved if we don't make them unique. There is code that make sure that you can't use two newsletters on one page etc. It will also eliminate the fatal error.

Why can users that don't have any "newsletter-*" permissions even see the "View source" button? - It don't work for them. They will get a "Permission error" if trying to click there.

There need to be uploaded a new image, the other one is too big as I can see. Is there anyone who can resize the image to fit 135x135?

You got a point. It would only be useless to have there. It's doing nothing just sitting there and can always be retrieved again if needed.

Okay, do anyone know what to do with the old logo? - Is this the correct way:

So the Wikimedia Sverige's logo should be changed to Wikimedia_Sverige_logo_-_vertical_square.svg?