Talk:MediaWiki database policy

Add a requirement to use abstract schema?
We've now moved all production code over to use abstract schema. Can we add this as an explicit requirement to this document? Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 19:17, 13 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Potential text, as a bullet at the start of the "Schema changes" section:
 * "All new tables in core and Wikimedia-deployed extensions must be implemented using the abstract schema system, and new schema changes to them must be generated automatically."
 * Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 13:00, 15 July 2022 (UTC)


 * +1 on my side. ASarabadani (WMF) (talk) 13:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 * +1 sounds good to me. Could you add some draft text for people to consider here? KHarlan (WMF) (talk) 12:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @KHarlan (WMF) ✅. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 13:01, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * +1 from me; suggest making the text …and new schema changes generated automatically, since AFAIK there’s no intention to retroactively generate old schema changes. (With the newish policy to only support upgrades from up to two LTSes ago, old schema changes are eventually removed anyways.) Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 13:07, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Sure, adjusted. I didn't think that was necessary, but if it's clearer. :-) Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 13:16, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * +1, SGTM. Thanks! Martin Urbanec (talk) 13:21, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes please! &mdash; Mainframe98 talk 13:56, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * +1 also from me, maybe include "bundled extensions" in the sentence. If a extension from the list of extensions awaiting review is close to get deployed, it should be revisited for the new requierement (but the list looks old, it seems no extension is in that state) Der Umherirrende (talk) 18:16, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Should it say "All new tables" or just "All tables"? The former would allow deploying an extension which hasn't been updated to use abstract tables, which I assume we don't want. --Tgr (WMF) (talk) 18:36, 15 July 2022 (UTC)