Talk:Release notes/1.6

From MediaWiki.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Spam Protection[edit]

Great problem in my privat wiki: Once I activated spam protection. Now I cannot save edited pages if I have a link to my Blog http://blog(dot)hr(minus)schmitz.de. The spam filter refuses to save the page because of blog(dot)hr. Thanks for a hint to swich it off, --Reinard 16:44, 1 July 2006 (UTC) ( reinard@mac.com )

Upgrade[edit]

hello all,

how to upgrade correctly from 1.5.8 to 1.60, you said i must look in the files named UPGRADE but i only see this :

== IMPORTANT: Upgrading to 1.5 ==

and not Upgrading to 1.6

thx --82.231.90.124 19:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

See Manual:Upgrading to 1.6. Rob Church 01:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

refreshLinks.php[edit]

How does one 'run refreshLinks.php' without access to the command line? --24.41.80.220 21:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

You can't. Use a bot to null edit each page. Rob Church 01:40, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
The amusing thing is I'll bet you actually thought that was a useful response.
Naught save a symptom of a problem. Sadly MediaWiki has, with each iteration, come to more and more rely on features and capabilities not available to the average person who does not run their own server. This is all well and good, the problem is that the devs are writing MediaWiki for a specific application, use, and environment, but are releasing it as a piece of software for general use -- something for which it is no longer (if it ever really was) suited. It is long past time for Wikimedia to seriously reconsider whether realeasing MediaWiki to the public is a good idea. There are many other Wiki packages available, most of them far better suited for general use, but a lot of people go with MediaWiki because of the name and its use on Wikipedia. They then end up locked into wiki software that has a steep learning curve, lacks even the most basic of user management functions, is about as user-unfriendly as can be imagined (seemingly proudly so), is comparatively difficult to update, and which they will likely not at all be able to update at some point in the future. Such wikis end up being spam hosts more than anything else.
I'm not debating MediaWiki's utility for Wikimedia projects, only its utility for more general wikis. At the very least the nature of MediaWiki, as a piece of software written specifically and only for a particular application and a particular environment, needs to be more clear. Beyond that, there should be some reconsidering of whether MediaWiki should be publicly available. --24.41.80.220 15:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I dispute this claim much, and I think those who develop or have developed MediaWiki would too, otherwise it would not be publically available. The earliest versions of MediaWiki might well have been developed specifically for wikipedia. Wikipedia was originally powerd by UseModWiki, a very primitve wiki package indeed, written in pearl rather than PHP. I believe that a new package was developed for wikipedia becuase at the time, no other existing wikipackage had the capacity equivelant to what at the time were the latest forum software packages. With a large number of configurations and and lagre number of extensions, MediaWiki is today the PhPBB of wiki packages. --MyrtonosTry liquid theads 10:15, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikia wikis?[edit]

Any idea when Memory Alpha will be upgraded with this version? --172.150.83.236 03:12, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

My contacts say Wikia is planning to upgrade their hosted wikis to 1.6 Real Soon Now, but you should bug them rather than us if it's taking longer than expected. :) --Brion VIBBER 05:27, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Oh, believe me, I have been bugging them. ;) My apologies, though, I thought you guys also had a hand in the upgrades. Whoopsie! Just ignore me then. Thanks for the update, though. :) --137.155.21.101 14:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)