User talk:😂

Re: Project talk:Administrators
I've reverted your edit here. Simply because you disagree that it should be done does not make for a lack of consensus. If no local admin is around, and a steward can clean up vandalism/spam/other messes, why shouldn't they? I for one welcome participation from users whom this isn't necessarily their home project (or even if they are here a lot, they're not a local admin). Asking them to ignore something like vandalism until the community can deal with it strikes me as a bad idea. ^demon 14:06, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
 * For your information, what you did, ^demon, was exactly what you accuse me of doing. I didn't revert because it happened to be my opinion; I reverted because consensus for *anything* on stewards remained unclear. You, however, re-added the non-agreed-upon material, so it was you who did something out of form here. I am happy for that material to be added if there is consensus for it; however, at the time of its addition, there was not. &mdash; Anonymous Dissident  Talk 07:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Just an update: since consensus has been found for the text to be on there, I've presently closed the discussion and the text will now remain. The difference between now and yesterday is that there is a visible difference in those who agree and those who do not. &mdash; Anonymous Dissident  Talk 07:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

commandLine.inc
Hello ^demon. I have a question regarding the following from your maintenance-work page:
 * 18855 - require commandLine.inc properly (will be INVALID, commandLine.inc will be phased out)

Where can I find information and/or discussion about this change? I have extensions that depend on commandLine.inc, and am interested to know how the functionality will be maintained if it is phased out. Best regards, $wgUser 21:18, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The main source of information about this branch (svn commits) can be found at the subpage you linked. The docs, in particular, are located in docs/maintenance.txt. I plan to leave commandLine.inc in place for backward-compatibility. This is for the exact reason you mentioned: third party sites may very well still use commandLine.inc (which works just fine, and forms a large basis of the new  abstract Maintenance class). I may throw a warning in it about it being deprecated, but it should still work as is just fine. Porting maintenance scripts to the new format is easy, and will allow for greater flexibility in the future. The docs should outline how to do this. If you need anymore help, let me know here or on IRC (^demon in #mediawiki on freenode). Thanks for your questions. ^demon