Talk:Debian packages

Thanks
Fantastic work! Let's make sure we get the word out to the world. Added to https://wiki.debian.org/MediaWiki#New_Debian_package for now. Nemo 17:30, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks :) It was on my list to update that page - I've removed all the old information from there and made it a stripped down version of this one. Legoktm (talk) 20:02, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, that works too. If the old package is not even worth mentioning, should you perhaps ask to take over the "official" Debian package? Nemo 20:06, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Er, I already *do* maintain the official package . Debian Jessie users are installing the package from the official Debian repositories, and it's going to be included with the Stretch release. Legoktm (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh good. From the page I got the impression that the PPA was the only option available to download the package. Nemo 21:22, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Extensions?
Hi there, I see a comment that extensions are no longer supported. But how can I get them back into working order? I am looking for the math and graphviz extensions. How should I install them / clean up the old files in

/etc/mediawiki-extensions/* ?

Thank you!Florihupf (talk) 23:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Florihupf, you should install extensions into the normal MediaWiki extension directory, and add the proper wfLoadExtension(...) calls to your LocalSettings.php file. Legoktm (talk) 05:07, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Ok, it is all good now! Thanks! Florihupf (talk) 19:02, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Sure that placing in  is the proper way to do it with this package? I mean, why so   and  ? --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 18:24, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes. Those are legacy and left over from the old mediawiki-extensions packages. Since people may have referenced them in their LocalSettings.php I didn't remove them yet. Legoktm (talk) 23:53, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Beyond Debian
At FOSDEM the people behind http://openbuildservice.org/ stressed that they have a lot of computing resources available for people to make packages for other distributions as well. Is it worth trying to get more packages? --Nemo 20:06, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Potential double negative?
> In the past these packages were severely outdated ...

Maybe this whole subclause should be moved to its own notice box: "This package supercedes all previous packages, which are now dangerously outdated ...". Awesome work packaging, thanks! I'm happy to be trying out on puppetized VPS for a personal project. Adamw (talk) 07:52, 11 July 2017 (UTC)