Talk:Wikimedia Labs/Toolserver features wanted in Tool Labs

"It isn't really relevant in labs"
I've no idea what this sentence means. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that most Toolserver user never bothered to try Wikimedia Labs because it's considered too complex (and useless for their needs, so far), so: how many users have good knowledge of both, to ensure communication and reciprocal understanding is possible? Also, the wishlist is a good thing, but why doesn't the WMF study the Toolserver architecture (from a user perspective), replicate it as far as possible to make transition smooth, and provide a document describing what the differences will be and why, asking feedback, rather than only asking users to reverse engineer their needs to propose architectural solutions as if they were the platform engineers? --Nemo 05:25, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
 * We're not here to re-implement the Toolserver, some of the choices specifically say away from being Toolserver like. Home dirs are personal, they don't allow easy collaboration. If one person decides to leave, their tools should be maintainable by others. On the development side of things, everything should be shared. On the production side it should be packaged and run on restricted hosts. DamianZaremba (talk) 11:20, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but I didn't ask for philosophy. My question stands. See also toolserver-l. --Nemo 11:27, 27 September 2012 (UTC)