Thread:Talk:MediaWiki vendors/share your experience/improvements/reply

I don't think that this will work this way. You say "Guys, please share your experience and your software" and guys start to share all they have. Our company understand the importance of sharing as much code as we can but we don't do that yet.

Let's think why we should do that:
 * 1) the extension that is available on mw.org will have some documentation. It's useful to have some documentation even for yourself.
 * 2) it's good advertisement and part of the portfolio of the company. "Hey, I know WikiVote! They've developed this cool extension! I think I will recommend them to my friend who want to do a wiki project".
 * 3) if someone use your extension you have free testers that will report you about the bugs
 * 4) if I patch  Yaron's extension and Yaron integrate my code into repository then from now he will support and bugfix this code. So we now have free-of-charge part-time developer.
 * 5) During the process of acceptance of my patch Yaron will beat my kidneys out to improve my code (will point on errors and coding style). The quality of code will be better.

Let's think now why we don't do that:
 * 1) There are too many extensions here and there is no rating of them. Very useful and mature extensions are hard to differ from experimental and poor-written. Better categorization, an expertise and competitions of the extensions (like "Extension of the month") can make the situation better.
 * 2) We're not sure that this is a good advertisement for us. The list of companies that Maria have compiled is the only list of companies I'm aware of. What about company profiles here on mw.org and creating the infrastructure/frames/motivation for us to write self-descriptions, success stories, etc?
 * 3) We're too lazy to find time to invest into open-sourcing our extensions because of (1) and (5) of the previous list. This is just wrong and we have to change here.