[gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 399 bytes --]

All,

some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring
it up here as well.

I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very
nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.

Thanks,

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Brian Evans]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 810 bytes --]

On 7/3/2018 1:39 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
> 
> some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring
> it up here as well.
> 
> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very
> nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
> 

For what purpose? The Handbook? No objections to that as it is limited
access already. We just go back to what we were doing in CVS.

If there is to be a replacement, then it should be equal access to what
we have now.

Users can create and edit pages which are not protected  (currently by
namespaces).

This should continue IMO.

Brian



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 834 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 999 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 01:47:19PM -0400, Brian Evans wrote:
> On 7/3/2018 1:39 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > All,
> > 
> > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring
> > it up here as well.
> > 
> > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very
> > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
> > 
> 
> For what purpose? The Handbook? No objections to that as it is limited
> access already. We just go back to what we were doing in CVS.

We should definitely use git not cvs. :p
We don't have to go back to what we were doing in cvs,.

There are wikis out there such as gollum, gitit and ikiwiki to name a
few, which allow full access to the content via vcs [1].

William

[1] https://stackoverflow.com/questions/8255749/wikis-with-vcs-backends

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Jonas Stein]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1035 bytes --]

> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? 

I think the wiki is very useful and should remain.

> It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.

I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the
wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the
existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure
user accounts.

Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long
footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."?

For the special case of the Gentoo Manual:
I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository,
because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better
to make PRs for the manual.

[1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/WilliamH

-- 
Best,
Jonas


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1799 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:20:53PM +0200, Jonas Stein wrote:
> > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? 
> 
> I think the wiki is very useful and should remain.

Like I said, there are wiki packages out there like gollum, ikiwiki, and
probably others which would allow editing of content via text files and
use vcs's for version control of the changes, so I'm not advocating for
shutting down the wiki. I think we should have one that is more
accessible to users who want to use different interfaces. We shouldn't
be forcing users to use a full web browser just to contribute to the
wiki.

> > It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
> 
> I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the
> wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the
> existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure
> user accounts.

If that is converted from markdown, all you would have to do is use the
markdown directly if the new wiki supports it.

> 
> Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long
> footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."?

I have no idea about that, but that alone shouldn't stop this from
happening.

> For the special case of the Gentoo Manual:
> I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository,
> because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better
> to make PRs for the manual.

I don't really see the manual as a special case. We should use the same
interface for everything.

William

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[M. J. Everitt]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2236 bytes --]

On 03/07/18 21:01, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:20:53PM +0200, Jonas Stein wrote:
>>> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
>>> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? 
>> I think the wiki is very useful and should remain.
> Like I said, there are wiki packages out there like gollum, ikiwiki, and
> probably others which would allow editing of content via text files and
> use vcs's for version control of the changes, so I'm not advocating for
> shutting down the wiki. I think we should have one that is more
> accessible to users who want to use different interfaces. We shouldn't
> be forcing users to use a full web browser just to contribute to the
> wiki.
>
>>> It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
>>> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
>> I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the
>> wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the
>> existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure
>> user accounts.
> If that is converted from markdown, all you would have to do is use the
> markdown directly if the new wiki supports it.
>
>> Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long
>> footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."?
> I have no idea about that, but that alone shouldn't stop this from
> happening.
>
>> For the special case of the Gentoo Manual:
>> I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository,
>> because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better
>> to make PRs for the manual.
> I don't really see the manual as a special case. We should use the same
> interface for everything.
>
> William
1) I think this idea was floated before, and failed before ..
2) Existing wiki team are badly understaffed, how would this improve
things? How would new maintainers be registered and managed?
3) Are you volunteering to implement this change yourself (infra are
equally understaffed) and manage the change and transition, in addition
to your existing commitments?


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2883 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:09:16PM +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote:
> On 03/07/18 21:01, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 09:20:53PM +0200, Jonas Stein wrote:
> >>> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> >>> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? 
> >> I think the wiki is very useful and should remain.
> > Like I said, there are wiki packages out there like gollum, ikiwiki, and
> > probably others which would allow editing of content via text files and
> > use vcs's for version control of the changes, so I'm not advocating for
> > shutting down the wiki. I think we should have one that is more
> > accessible to users who want to use different interfaces. We shouldn't
> > be forcing users to use a full web browser just to contribute to the
> > wiki.
> >
> >>> It would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> >>> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
> >> I think it is more efficient to convert your yearly contributions to the
> >> wiki [1] manually from markdown to mediawiki, instead to convert the
> >> existent wiki pages to anything plus setup a new engine and configure
> >> user accounts.
> > If that is converted from markdown, all you would have to do is use the
> > markdown directly if the new wiki supports it.
> >
> >> Btw: Would a conversion to another wiki mean that we get another long
> >> footer on every wikipage "This page was edited by... do not remove..."?
> > I have no idea about that, but that alone shouldn't stop this from
> > happening.
> >
> >> For the special case of the Gentoo Manual:
> >> I think the Gentoo Manual is better maintained in a git repository,
> >> because it was initially written like a book and sometimes it is better
> >> to make PRs for the manual.
> > I don't really see the manual as a special case. We should use the same
> > interface for everything.
> >
> > William
> 1) I think this idea was floated before, and failed before ..

That's not a reason for not floating it again.

> 2) Existing wiki team are badly understaffed, how would this improve
> things? How would new maintainers be registered and managed?

It improves things by offering more flexable ways for users to edit the
wiki. if you want to use a browser you can, or you can use something
like git and edit the content that way.

I don't know for sure how maintainers would be registered and managed,
but I don't know that on mw either.

> 3) Are you volunteering to implement this change yourself (infra are
> equally understaffed) and manage the change and transition, in addition
> to your existing commitments?

I'm not on the infra team, so I would have to be added there to be able
to do it I guess, but I would be willing to assist if I could.

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Matt Turner]

On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:39 PM William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring
> it up here as well.
>
> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very
> nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.

I assume that your primary reason for wanting to replace mediawiki is
to improve accessibility. I suggest you state that more clearly when
making such a proposal.

I read from jstein's email that he does not have the same knowledge of
the situation that I have, and so his reply is expectedly different
from mine.

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1100 bytes --]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2018 at 10:31:20PM -0400, Matt Turner wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 3, 2018 at 1:39 PM William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > All,
> >
> > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring
> > it up here as well.
> >
> > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very
> > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
> 
> I assume that your primary reason for wanting to replace mediawiki is
> to improve accessibility. I suggest you state that more clearly when
> making such a proposal.

Everyone would benefit, so it isn't specifically tied to that. I see it
more tied to universal design, which accessibility is a part of.

If you want to edit with a browser like you do now, you would be able
to continue doing that. But, if you want to edit files locally and use
git to push your changes, that would be an option as well.

William

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Jonas Stein]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 708 bytes --]

>> some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring
>> it up here as well.
>>
>> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
>> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very
>> nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
>> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
> 
> I assume that your primary reason for wanting to replace mediawiki is
> to improve accessibility. I suggest you state that more clearly when
> making such a proposal.

I see.
Is it possible to improve the accessibility for mediawiki
and do we have volunteers to do that?

-- 
Best,
Jonas


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1083 bytes --]

On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 12:39:43 -0500
William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very
> nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.

1. Who are the primary beneficiaries of this suggestion?:

  a. People with expert knowledge of development systems and people
     with Gentoo Privileges
 
  b. End users who may not be experts, in all things development, but
     may be able to contribute and consume content.

2. What compromises in flexibility does this create? Eg: Do suggested
   replacements have capacity to have arbitrary HTML and templating? Or
   are they restricted to the terribly narrow featureset of Markdown?


If you're optimising for 1-a and your choice of compromise results in a
reduction in functionality with regards to clear, flexible, and
expressive content, it will be hard to sell me on the idea.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Brian Dolbec]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1928 bytes --]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 19:21:53 +1200
Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 12:39:43 -0500
> William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into
> > killing mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It
> > would be very nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or
> > another similar format and use git to control the changes instead
> > of editing in a browser.  
> 
> 1. Who are the primary beneficiaries of this suggestion?:
> 
>   a. People with expert knowledge of development systems and people
>      with Gentoo Privileges
>  
>   b. End users who may not be experts, in all things development, but
>      may be able to contribute and consume content.
> 
> 2. What compromises in flexibility does this create? Eg: Do suggested
>    replacements have capacity to have arbitrary HTML and templating?
> Or are they restricted to the terribly narrow featureset of Markdown?
> 
> 
> If you're optimising for 1-a and your choice of compromise results in
> a reduction in functionality with regards to clear, flexible, and
> expressive content, it will be hard to sell me on the idea.
> 

3)  The ability of someone with a sight disability, the actual ability
to contribute to the project.  We as a project should try make our
documentation accessible to as broad an audience as possible.


I know from personal experience and having worked with such a person,
to make it possible to work with cli tools to be able to interact with
normally browser only visual interfaces which are extremely poor to
work with using a screen reader.  At my work, I personally made a github
python library and cli interface for github, and worked to create
templates for a go-jira command line interface so a visually impaired
co-worker could interact with those systems.


-- 
Brian Dolbec <dolsen>


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 981 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1658 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 04, 2018 at 07:21:53PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jul 2018 12:39:43 -0500
> William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend? It would be very
> > nice to be able to edit wiki pages in markdown or another similar format
> > and use git to control the changes instead of editing in a browser.
> 
> 1. Who are the primary beneficiaries of this suggestion?:
> 
>   a. People with expert knowledge of development systems and people
>      with Gentoo Privileges
>  
>   b. End users who may not be experts, in all things development, but
>      may be able to contribute and consume content.

Anyone really could benefit from it. The replacements are wikis, so if
you want to edit via the web like you do now, that's still available.

> 
> 2. What compromises in flexibility does this create? Eg: Do suggested
>    replacements have capacity to have arbitrary HTML and templating? Or
>    are they restricted to the terribly narrow featureset of Markdown?
 
 Several of them support multiple formats, so that would depend on the
 replacement chosen.

> If you're optimising for 1-a and your choice of compromise results in a
> reduction in functionality with regards to clear, flexible, and
> expressive content, it will be hard to sell me on the idea.

Yes I would benefit from this change, but it is not a case of optimizing
for one. It is a case of opening up the use of the wiki to the largest
audiance possible. This is just good universal design.

Thanks,

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1725 bytes --]

On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:44:11 -0500
William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Yes I would benefit from this change, but it is not a case of optimizing
> for one. It is a case of opening up the use of the wiki to the largest
> audiance possible. This is just good universal design.

Unfortunately,  my experience with wiki's indicates that's not really an
option we have.

There are lots of different formats, sure, but lots of those formats
reduce to being restrictive, declarative formats, where "content" is
stuffed into a range of formats predefined in the markups syntax.

This ultimately ends up *restricting* the range of *visual* tools at
our disposal for distinguishing details on a case-by-case basis, by
forcing all details to adhere to a universally simplified scheme.

While I do appreciate the difficulty presented to people with
sight-impairment, I'd opt primarily for choices that help them
*without* compromising the range of options we have for visual
distinguishers.

Just as it stands, a syntax that is represented as a simplification of
HTML via templates, where new terms can be created in terms of HTML,
and where raw HTML can be used in a pinch, tends to make the best of
these options for unimpaired people.

Its a shitty situation all round really, because as best as I can tell,
there's no choice without some painful compromise for somebody.

So while a universal design is an admirable goal, I fear in practice it
will have the same results as what "universal interfaces" achieve:

A reduction in net functionality because the more interesting/advanced
functionality is out of the reach of some users.

( Yes, yes, I'm aware of my sight-privilege talking )

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1247 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 01:26:51PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jul 2018 12:44:11 -0500
> William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > Yes I would benefit from this change, but it is not a case of optimizing
> > for one. It is a case of opening up the use of the wiki to the largest
> > audiance possible. This is just good universal design.
> 
> Unfortunately,  my experience with wiki's indicates that's not really an
> option we have.
> 
> There are lots of different formats, sure, but lots of those formats
> reduce to being restrictive, declarative formats, where "content" is
> stuffed into a range of formats predefined in the markups syntax.
> 
> This ultimately ends up *restricting* the range of *visual* tools at
> our disposal for distinguishing details on a case-by-case basis, by
> forcing all details to adhere to a universally simplified scheme.
> 
> While I do appreciate the difficulty presented to people with
> sight-impairment, I'd opt primarily for choices that help them
> *without* compromising the range of options we have for visual
> distinguishers.

That's the whole point of the discussion.
Have you even looked at gollum for example? it can support mw markdown.

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 740 bytes --]

On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:44:42 -0500
William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Have you even looked at gollum for example? it can support mw markdown.

I've looked at it, but none of my reading of online material indicates
whether it supports more than the existing media-wiki *syntax*.

For instance, Gollum states support for macros, but definition of those 
macros requires writing ruby code, which is a far stretch from
MediaWiki's "other wiki articles are your macros"

Nothing I've read clarifies my confusion as to whether gollum actually
supports all the *features* of MediaWiki, only seeming to indicate it
supports syntax-mimicry.

Which, if true, would fall into the category of "Not a suitable
replacement"


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Nils Freydank]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 490 bytes --]

Am Dienstag, 3. Juli 2018, 19:39:43 CEST schrieb William Hubbs:
> All,
> 
> some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring
> it up here as well.
> 
> I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> mediawiki and look at something with a git backend?
What about https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki?
"Gate between Git and Mediawiki" sounds as it would be the right extension
while mediawiki can be kept.

Best Regards
Nils Freydank

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 748 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 05, 2018 at 11:08:10AM +0200, Nils Freydank wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 3. Juli 2018, 19:39:43 CEST schrieb William Hubbs:
> > All,
> > 
> > some of us have talked about this on IRC off and on, but I want to bring
> > it up here as well.
> > 
> > I don't care that we have a wiki, but can we please look into killing
> > mediawiki and look at something with a git backend?
> What about https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki?
> "Gate between Git and Mediawiki" sounds as it would be the right extension
> while mediawiki can be kept.

I looked at this first, and it is very hard on the server.
Every pull or clone you do to update things works like an initial clone,
so it takes pretty massive resources.

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 739 bytes --]

On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:32:20 -0500
William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I looked at this first, and it is very hard on the server.
> Every pull or clone you do to update things works like an initial clone,
> so it takes pretty massive resources.

Surely, then the recommended approach involves:

1. Selecting pages [1]
2. Limiting clone depth [2]

Or at least, encouraging the use of by_rev [3]

1: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#limit-the-pages-to-be-imported
2: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#shallow-imports
3: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#optimizing-git-fetch



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1016 bytes --]

On Fri, Jul 06, 2018 at 12:34:33PM +1200, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:32:20 -0500
> William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > I looked at this first, and it is very hard on the server.
> > Every pull or clone you do to update things works like an initial clone,
> > so it takes pretty massive resources.
> 
> Surely, then the recommended approach involves:
> 
> 1. Selecting pages [1]
> 2. Limiting clone depth [2]
> 
> Or at least, encouraging the use of by_rev [3]
> 
> 1: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#limit-the-pages-to-be-imported
> 2: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#shallow-imports
> 3: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#optimizing-git-fetch
> 
> 

There are also other issues I'm not really familiar with because of how
mediawiki's error handling works (Patrick could tell you more about this
than I can).

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: killing mediawiki

[Ulrich Mueller]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1089 bytes --]

>>>>> On Fri, 6 Jul 2018, Kent Fredric wrote:

> On Thu, 5 Jul 2018 12:32:20 -0500
> William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

>> I looked at this first, and it is very hard on the server.
>> Every pull or clone you do to update things works like an initial
>> clone, so it takes pretty massive resources.

> Surely, then the recommended approach involves:

> 1. Selecting pages [1]
> 2. Limiting clone depth [2]

> Or at least, encouraging the use of by_rev [3]

That will change it from being completely unusable to barely usable.
Still it isn't something I would want to use on a daily basis.

I have tried it when helping with the conversion of the GLEPs.
For fetching only, so I don't know what would happen when trying to
push a page back to the wiki.

Ulrich

> 1: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#limit-the-pages-to-be-imported
> 2: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#shallow-imports
> 3: https://github.com/Git-Mediawiki/Git-Mediawiki/blob/master/docs/User-manual.md#optimizing-git-fetch

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]