User talk:Guillom

Wikimedia maintenance notice
Hi. Wikimedia maintenance notice and all of its subpages do not belong on this site. I think there's some general confusion about the purpose of this site. It's for the MediaWiki software. That's it. Meta-Wiki is much older and is the established place for inter-wiki communications such as these. Because the banner is currently up, I'm not going to forcefully move all of these pages, but they should be moved as soon as possible. --MZMcBride 16:42, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, do we have a location we can house notices that doesn't go away when the site is down? Because that would be ideal. -- ArielGlenn 16:52, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Sorry to butt in but I thought this might be related, someone was asking earlier, if it would be possible to modify the 404 page with notices and links to an upcoming outage. Theo10011 17:05, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't imagine many people hit 404s during outages like these. It might be possible to modify some HTTP error code messages to include a link to status.wikimedia.org or something. File bugs in Bugzilla as appropriate. --MZMcBride 17:10, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * The wikitech.wikimedia.org host is supposed to be separated from the main cluster for that reason. Though I have no idea what the load spike would be from a global banner with a link, so that might be something to consider. Meta-Wiki is the most logical place among Wikimedia wikis. If the wikitech host isn't an option, the status.wikimedia.org host might also be logical. Pretty much "anywhere but here." ;-) --MZMcBride 17:10, 24 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. My apologies for not responding sooner. Someone asked me on IRC why I had put the page here, and my answer was: "The last time we used a maintenance banner was for the deployment of MediaWiki 1.17, and the page we linked to back then was on mediawiki.org". I had only a few hours to prepare this last week, and I just didn't think much about which wiki was best.
 * I agree meta is the logical place for this set of pages, which is why I've just exported them there. There are reasons for using the wikitech wiki, but also reasons for not using it (e.g. it's not a SUL wiki, people can't contribute translations there, etc.).
 * Maybe we'll find a better place in the future (e.g. a place that doesn't go down when the site is down, but can still handle high traffic when linked from CentralNotice, and where people can contribute translations), but for now meta is a good enough place. guillom 13:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

WMF projects updates
Creative use of LabeledSectionTransclusion could help to automagically include status updated about single projects from the monthly report (or viceversa). Nemo 16:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Great minds! This is exactly why I had LabeledSectionTransclusion enabled on this wiki :) See Template:Wikimedia engineering project information for example. That said, right now I'm only using it for basic project information, and not yet for statuses, because I need to finish to convert the pages to the new format. guillom 16:55, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Temporary redirect
Hi. How temporary is this? --MZMcBride 23:08, 18 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Hey. I never got around to officially publishing the draft index that lies in my user space, mostly because I haven't found a way to handle projects hosted outside mw.o. I'm very busy until the end of October with the MediaWiki architecture document, but if you have ideas in the meantime, I welcome them. guillom 08:46, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Status updates from the future
I was just looking at some of the recent status updates and noticed that they all seem to be from five days from now. Why are they labelled like that? --Yair rand 18:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi. These updates are transcluded from the monthly report (Wikimedia engineering report/2011/October), so I use the date of the last day of that month. The updates are expected to be an accurate reflection of what happened during that month, so if there's new information in the next 5 days, the statuses will be updated. HTH, guillom 19:02, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

excellent MediaWiki architecture document, possible intro
I found MediaWiki architecture document/text from Sumana Harihareswara's post mentioning it, it's fantastic!

I assume then it will get categories and a lot of missing wiki linking (few will have heard of PECL). If you need help with that, let me know ("spage" on the server skierpage.com). Already it's so good I added a link to it to Manual:MediaWiki architecture

A diagram or bulleted list of Wikipedia vs. Wikimedia vs. MediaWiki would help and could serve as an intro e,g,
 * Everyone's heard of Wikipedia, the free, web-based, collaborative, multilingual encyclopedia project. It and similar collaborative knowledge projects such as Wiktionary and Wikiquote are supported by the non-profit Wikimedia Foundation. They run on the software platform MediaWiki, free and open source software written in PHP. The common theme in each name is wiki, a website that allows users to create and collaboratively edit web pages via a web browser..

-- skierpage 23:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Right now I don't think wiki-linking categorization is a priority given that this is primarily focused for inclusion elsewhere (A book, right?). Later though, probably. Johnduhart 23:59, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Lua scripting
Hi. In this edit, there's an incomplete sentence ("Templates and ParserFunctions were introduced to allow end users of MediaWiki to build, effectively turning wikitext into a limited programming language.") that's still incomplete. Any idea what you were going for? --MZMcBride 03:52, 27 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Ugh, thanks. I just added some stuff that I think is what I intended to put in there back then. I hope it makes some sense. guillom 10:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Comment / highlight system
Thank you for the link, I'll pass it along with your appreciation to Laurentius, who reported me that page. :-) Nemo 19:03, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Screenshots and categories
Hello, is there any way to make WMF employees categorize their images and files? Especially when one is uploading dozens of screenshots or mockups for their software development project, I suppose they want them to actually be seen and not just lost in an ocean of unbrowsable files. Currently, the only reliable way to find such files is to open the upload log of all WMF employees/contractors (and there are hundreds) on both commons and mediawiki.org; files in some of the subcats of commons:Category:Wikimedia Foundation software development and commons:Category:MediaWiki extensions were practically impossible to find. Creating a category is really not that hard, they probably only need to know that they can/should create one for their project under one of those two on Commons. The same for licensing info and so on, by the way; a normal CC-BY-SA tag and/or something as simple as is usually enough of a file description, without filling all the forms etc.; and if even WMF employees were too scared by Commons to find out, I'd really be extremely depressed. --Nemo 07:48, 30 August 2012 (UTC)