Talk:MediaWiki-Docker
Add topic| This page used the Structured Discussions extension to give structured discussions. It has since been converted to wikitext, so the content and history here are only an approximation of what was actually displayed at the time these comments were made. |
Simplify the page
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Would it make sense to simplify the page by moving all text to a sub-page? Similar to Selenium and Blubber. I would like to avoid this page eventually looking like MediaWiki-Vagrant. ZFilipin (WMF) (talk) 09:48, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- @ZFilipin (WMF) that's fine with with me! KHarlan (WMF) (talk) 10:33, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
- I've created phab:T256470. We can discuss the details there. ZFilipin (WMF) (talk) 10:52, 26 June 2020 (UTC)
All doc pages are wrong?
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
There is no <code>core</code> directory under mediawiki. All the extension etc. doc pages start with <code>cd mediawiki/core</code>. Was this changed at some point and docs not updated? Nikerabbit (talk) 09:23, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- You're right, the main page says clone to "mediawiki" and then each extension page says go to mediawiki/core.
- The extension pages should probably say "cd /path/to/where/you/cloned/mediawiki" or just say, "make sure you are in the MediaWiki core directory before proceeding". KHarlan (WMF) (talk) 09:47, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- I updated one (Echo) from where I forked Translate. Nikerabbit (talk) 12:51, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
- Apologies for the late reply. I took a look a the majority of the pages. (I'm still working on the last few.) 41% of the pages I've looked seem to be correct. (My assumption is that if repository's Selenium test suite passes, the extension/skin is installed correctly.) See T256239. I'll update the pages so they follow a better template. See MediaWiki-Docker/Extension/AbuseFilter for an example. Please let me know if you have any feedback or questions. Here or in Phabricator. ZFilipin (WMF) (talk) 10:37, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
docker to host small wikis
[edit]I have created one docker setup that I used to develop and my private wiki instances. https://github.com/physikerwelt/mediawiki-docker I am now considering to restart that project based on the docker compose file provided by core. I am planning to change
- the database
- the caching mechanism
- search
- passwords
- LocalSettings
Is there something else I should change to the *bad things* which are described in the warning in the beginning of the quick-start. Physikerwelt (talk) 13:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Is MediaWiki-Docker-Dev abandoned? Should we denote that at the top of the article?
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
I made this edit based on this Talk: page entry for MediaWiki-Docker-Dev, in which a WMF account states that MediaWiki-Docker-Dev is an independent initiative the predates the core environment
. Since this project seems more active, and that Talk: page was last edited 3 years ago, can someone here enlighten me regarding the actual status? Is there a good template (something like w:Template:ambox) that can be plastered on the top of MediaWiki-Docker-Dev to state that it's abandoned, to avoid confusing people (like me) who search for "docker"? --Ernstkm (talk) 21:34, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
- I think you should ask on Talk:MediaWiki-Docker-Dev rather than here. This is the officially-supported environment for running MW for local development that's included with MediaWiki, but other systems exist for different use cases. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 23:10, 18 October 2023 (UTC)
- MediaWiki-Docker-Dev does, in fact, already have a {{Notice}} at the top stating that it's no longer maintained, which I am apparently completely blind to. So disregard all. Thanks for your patience. Ernstkm (talk) 02:55, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
Page title ambiguity
[edit]"MediaWiki-Docker" is unclear as to whether the page is about running a production instance, or development environment.
I propose moving this page to "Docker development environment". "MediaWiki-Docker" is not a distinct project as far as I can tell, but the hyphenation makes it seem so. "MediaWiki" itself seems accessory: this entire wiki is about it. Writing "development environment" in full may seem bulky, but it's completely unambiguous.
Since a lot of pages link here, I'd appreciate feedback before making any such change. Douginamug (talk) 10:34, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
- I have no opinion on changing the title yet. But there are a lot of subpages, so a title change would need to be done carefully and would take some work. MediaWiki-Docker also corresponds nicely to the name of the repo https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki-docker. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:10, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
- That repo however is not what this page is about, but instead it's the unofficial "Docker official image" stuff, now discussed at Docker/Docker Hub. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 12:28, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Douginamug: No, "MediaWiki-Docker" is a specific project, the MediaWiki-in-Docker environment included in the core of MediaWiki and in our main developer instructions, DEVELOPERS.md. General advice about docker can be found at Docker, but this is not that. Jdforrester (WMF) (talk) 12:27, 3 May 2025 (UTC)
- The lead of the article is MediaWiki-Docker is a Docker based development environment included with MediaWiki core. I agree that naming is hard and confusion is easy, but this seems to be unambiguously describing a local development environment. -- BDavis (WMF) (talk) 07:22, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Jdforrester (WMF) @BDavis (WMF) I see now that MediaWiki-Docker is a specific project, even though it doesn't live in its own git repository. The lead does states it is a development environment, but you first have to open the page to read that: I think it would be good to make this clear from the title in the long run. Yet until there is official Docker for production (T318977), I agree to just leave things the way they are. Douginamug (talk) 16:56, 7 May 2025 (UTC)