Template talk:Extension

Jump to: navigation, search

About this board


/Archive 1

Framawiki (talkcontribs)

Eg: take Extension:Newsletter

It would be great if we can have another section titled


You can contribute to the extension by:

$ git clone ssh://<USERNAME>@gerrit.wikimedia.org:29418/mediawiki/extensions/Newsletter.git

Moved from phab:T165808 -- 01tonythomas

Tacsipacsi (talkcontribs)

This is an infobox, it’s not for short stories but for​ basic data. “Contributing” can be a section in the main text, or in a README file in the Git root.

Seb35 (talkcontribs)

I’m also enclined to be against such a change, at least in the current presentation of the infobox: I find there are already too much things in this infobox and it is already difficult to read. I find a general re-organisation of the whole infobox would be very welcome, perhaps removing some links and/or using pictograms for some links.

A step further about what Tacsipacsi suggests, perhaps a template Contribute could be created and transcluded in the page, something like Template:ExtensionInstall does for installation.

Reply to "Add a 'Contributing' section"
Shirayuki (talkcontribs)

Use {{IfNotTranslation|{{FULLPAGENAME}}|{{BASEPAGENAME}}}} instead of {{FULLPAGENAME}}.

Ciencia Al Poder (talkcontribs)


Why not use always {{BASEPAGENAME}}? It should also work on english pages. You'll need also {{NAMESPACE}}.

Shirayuki (talkcontribs)

Are license names translatable?

Legoktm (talkcontribs)

Hmm, quickly looking at d:Q7603, some languages do have it translated, but many more don't and use the English version...

Shirayuki (talkcontribs)

Module:Extension (used by Template:Extension) returns the English version.

Reply to "license names translation"

no headings for readme and changelog, the whole "Download" section.

SPage (WMF) (talkcontribs)

In Extension:PieceOfCode I gave the readme parameter a value, but it just appears as an unidentified link under Download. I assume the same is true for changelog. The easy fix would be to provide link text for each, same as "Browse source code"

But with all these links, you're not downloading anything., so none belong under a Download column! They're just links to files that probably reflect the latest code, and the infobox seems to conflate this with "snapshot". It seems there should be a separate infobox section for Project, with links in it for browse source, view changes, readme, and changelog.

Ciencia Al Poder (talkcontribs)

Agree, although many of those links are generated by templates ({{GoogleCodeDownload}}, in that example), which would make it difficult to break into different sections

Reply to "no headings for readme and changelog, the whole "Download" section."

what should mediawiki parameter represent?

SPage (WMF) (talkcontribs)

Template parameters include

required version of MediaWiki

but is this the earliest version of MediaWiki for which there's a branch of the extension, or the earliest version of MediaWiki on which the extension's latest master will work?

There seems to be consensus that instead of the "master" branch supporting old MediaWiki releases, developers on releases should use the version of the extension tagged for that release from Special:ExtensionDistributor.

SPage (WMF) (talkcontribs)

In a related hack, in {{ExtensionInstall}} when it displays "To users running MediaWiki 1.24 or earlier: The instructions above describe the new way ..." I think[*] I added

(To run an extension on an earlier release, you may need to download the version of it tagged for that release from Special:ExtensionDistributor.)

It's really a more general point.

[*] I don't know how to test templates using TNT and translation.

Ciencia Al Poder (talkcontribs)

Note that even users running MediaWiki 1.25 should download the version tagged for that, because incompatibilities may happen if the extension was adapted to use new features introduced on master. This warning should probably be on the Special:ExtensionDistributor page

Ciencia Al Poder (talkcontribs)

It may also be "the latest know MediaWiki version where this extension has been tested and is supposed to work"

Reply to "what should mediawiki parameter represent?"
Qgil-WMF (talkcontribs)

Idea from S page, copied from bug 43545:

"https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:Extension should have a status=obsolete we can use for obsolete retired extensions, like https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:PrefSwitch . There is Template:ObsoleteExtension but it adds categories; obsolete extensions should be removed from categories such as extensions using SomeHook."

This post was posted by Qgil-WMF, but signed as Qgil.

Kghbln (talkcontribs)

The way I currently handle it is that I archive extensions listed in Category:Obsolete extensions after there is not supported version of MW around which may be used together with the respective extension. So the information provided with the obsolete template is not really best fit. No objections having this status since we already have "unmaintained".

Reply to "Request: add status=obsolete"

Add parameter to indicate whether DB update is needed post extension installation

Peachey88 (Flood) (talkcontribs)
<Wikinaut> yvipanda: does it need to run update.php after installation ? (this is not mentioned on http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ShortUrl )
<Reedy> Yes
<Reedy> That's somewhat stndard practise
<Wikinaut> Reedy, standard, yes/no, then please modify the Template:Extension info box, so that "php update.php" needed yes/no can be quickly indentified


This post was posted by Peachey88 (Flood), but signed as Reedy.

Peachey88 (Flood) (talkcontribs)

Hi, having this parameter was a very good idea. However I suggest to remove the explanation "php update.php needed after installation" from display. I takes heaps of space. I think everyone may just click on the link which takes one directly to the documentation of the parameter and its implications. Cheers

This post was posted by Peachey88 (Flood), but signed as Kghbln.

Juliano (talkcontribs)

It was annoying me too, so I went ahead and removed the explanation. I do not like boolean yes/no information presented in infoboxes this way. Cheers,

Reply to "Add parameter to indicate whether DB update is needed post extension installation"
Peachey88 (Flood) (talkcontribs)

in the section "Content Parameters"->Types->Interface->special, the external link to the SpecialPage.php is broken. i am not sure where should it link to.

This post was posted by Peachey88 (Flood), but signed as Hoorayforturtles.

Reply to "Broken link to SpecialPage.php"
Peachey88 (Flood) (talkcontribs)


1.15 to

|compatibility = 1.15


  1. the word "compatibility" not show up and
  2. check usage (experimental) appears outside of the template at the top of the page.

This post was posted by Peachey88 (Flood), but signed as Adamtheclown.

Reach Out to the Truth (talkcontribs)

That's not how it works. It's supposed to accept a {{Extension Testing}} table. But the project died in 2009, and I don't think I've seen anyone use the field correctly since then. Since it causes breakage when used improperly, I'd prefer to kill the field, or at list stop mentioning it in the {{Extension}} documentation to discourage its use.

Reply to "issues"
Peachey88 (Flood) (talkcontribs)

I've created Category:Extensions which add rights. Currently, additional user rights are not documented anywhere, and this can be very confusing (see e.g. Extension:AbuseFilter) because you have to look for a wiki where the right is available and check Special:ListGroupRights. Hopefully, all rights descriptions are in Mediawiki:Right-<rightname> messages, so I think that we could use the rights parameter to automatically list them with {{int:Right-<rightname>}}. To pass the list, we could either split the parameter in rights1, rights2 etc. or use the #titleparts "string parser & converter" (rights=name1/name2/name3 etc.); to add additional notes, I wonder if we should create a rightsnote1,2... or a single rightsnotes parameter.

This post was posted by Peachey88 (Flood), but signed as Nemo bis.

Peachey88 (Flood) (talkcontribs)

Right away I found two extensions that were using the rights field incorrectly, so I fixed them. I also found Extension:Ajax though, which has None entered into the rights and parameters field. Should that be removed to prevent the incorrect appearance of the extension adding user rights when it really doesn't?

Rights descriptions may not fit into the infobox well. "Perform captcha triggering actions without having to go through the captcha", which appears to be the longest extension-based right description on this wiki, spans two lines when I stick into the existing rights field. If there are several rights, or the descriptions are particularly long, that may get unwieldy. Also, getting the rights descriptions from messages is not something that will work in a lot of cases, because only a small amount of the extensions listed here are actually installed on MediaWiki.org. Perhaps it's best to just discuss the added rights in the extension documentation, as people are already being encouraged to do.

This post was posted by Peachey88 (Flood), but signed as Reach Out to the Truth.

Peachey88 (Flood) (talkcontribs)

To avoid at least a part of the duplicated work, we could create a template which creates a table with names, description and notes, where the description is taken directly from system messages if you say the template to do so (when the extension is installed here). What do you think?

This post was posted by Peachey88 (Flood), but signed as Nemo bis.

Reply to "User rights documentation"