Last modified: 2011-03-13 18:06:18 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia has migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports should be created and updated in Wikimedia Phabricator instead. Please create an account in Phabricator and add your Bugzilla email address to it.
Wikimedia Bugzilla is read-only. If you try to edit or create any bug report in Bugzilla you will be shown an intentional error message.
In order to access the Phabricator task corresponding to a Bugzilla report, just remove "static-" from its URL.
You could still run searches in Bugzilla or access your list of votes but bug reports will obviously not be up-to-date in Bugzilla.
Bug 3865 - Report bug link on every page
Report bug link on every page
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: Wikimedia
Classification: Unclassified
General/Unknown (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Lowest enhancement (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
:
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2005-11-03 08:39 UTC by Brian Jason Drake
Modified: 2011-03-13 18:06 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Web browser: ---
Mobile Platform: ---
Assignee Huggle Beta Tester: ---


Attachments

Description Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-03 08:39:32 UTC
If we can have prominent "edit this page" links, why not 
have prominent "report bug" links, especially when we are 
using our projects to test software?
Comment 1 Brion Vibber 2005-11-03 21:02:09 UTC
We're not using our projects to test software, we're writing software for the 
projects.
Comment 2 Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-05 08:10:56 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> We're not using our projects to test software, we're 
writing software for the projects.

The software is just as important a part of the projects 
as the content.
Comment 3 Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-05 08:12:05 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> We're not using our projects to test software, we're 
writing software for the projects.

The software is just as important a part of the 
projects 
as the content.
Comment 4 Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-05 08:12:48 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> We're not using our projects to test software, we're 
writing software for the projects.

If we're not using our projects to test software, why 
are we running them on "alpha" software that we advise 
others not to use?
Comment 5 Brion Vibber 2005-11-05 08:50:14 UTC
For the thousandth time, the software is written specifically to run the Wikimedia 
sites. That is its purpose in life.

Additionally, we make it available for third parties to use. There are version numbers 
slapped on to label the releases to third parties.
Comment 6 Brion Vibber 2005-11-05 08:59:26 UTC
Anyway, regarding adding a bug link: that can be done on any wiki by editing 
MediaWiki:Sidebar appropriately, if the people on that wiki want to have such a link.
Comment 7 Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 2005-11-05 09:03:34 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> For the thousandth time, the software is written specifically to run the
Wikimedia 
> sites. That is its purpose in life.
> 
> Additionally, we make it available for third parties to use. There are version
numbers 
> slapped on to label the releases to third parties.
> 

<CIA-12> vibber * phase3/includes/DefaultSettings.php: Change version number
from '1.6alpha' to '1.6devel' so know-it-alls who bitch about how we're running
alpha software can shut the fuck up

;)
Comment 8 Rob Church 2005-11-05 16:56:40 UTC
*Snicker*
Comment 9 Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-07 06:32:05 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> For the thousandth time, the software is written 
specifically to run the Wikimedia sites. That is its 
purpose in life.

This just validates my comments (2, 3):

The software is just as important a part of the 
projects as the content.

(In reply to comment #6)
> Anyway, regarding adding a bug link: that can be done 
on any wiki by editing 
MediaWiki:Sidebar appropriately, if the people on that 
wiki want to have such a link.

That's why this is filed under "Wikimedia web sites", 
not "MediaWiki".
Comment 10 Brion Vibber 2005-11-07 06:36:43 UTC
You want to talk to the community and sysops on whichever wiki(s) you want 
to add such a link. They can do this without the intervention of the 
developer team.
Comment 11 Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-07 06:41:52 UTC
All the wikis...but it doesn't look like anyone here 
agrees!
Comment 12 Brion Vibber 2005-11-07 06:52:20 UTC
The point is, no one here has to agree because it's not our decision. 
How to best expose the technical side of a bug report system to users is 
something that the community on the wiki would be more approriate to 
decide.

Eg currently there are links to bugzilla on the Village Pump (technical) 
on en.wikipedia; some things will then get reported directly into 
bugzilla while others will get discussed there until someone moves it 
over. On non-English wikis, exposing a Bugzilla link directly might be 
relatively unfriendly, but having it as a link on a first-level local 
page which explains what it's about and when issues should go here is 
very appropriate.
Comment 13 Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-08 07:32:37 UTC
(In reply to comment #12)
> [snip]
> On non-English wikis, exposing a Bugzilla link 
directly might be relatively unfriendly, but having it 
as a link on a first-level local page which explains 
what it's about and when issues should go here is very 
appropriate.

Are all our development work and tools in English (as 
far as I know, yes)? Why should they be, when all our 
other projects are multilingual?
Comment 14 Rowan Collins [IMSoP] 2005-11-08 20:16:03 UTC
(In reply to comment #13)
> Are all our development work and tools in English (as 
> far as I know, yes)? Why should they be, when all our 
> other projects are multilingual?

Because they are in whatever language most developers speak; this turns out to
be English, although I believe German would come second. Unlike the projects
themselves, the goal of MediaWiki is not to make its development open to all -
the goal is to facilitate its use by Wikimedia projects. Opening the development
tools up to other languages *might* help in that goal, but since the core
developers would then not understand them [and each other?], it might also
hinder it.

I think the mistake you are making is considering the software to be *part of*
"the projects", when in reality it exists outside of them, as a tool to
facilitate them. It's true that it's a very *important* tool, and the success of
the projects is closely bound to its quality and development; but that doesn't
mean it must necessarily be bound by the same rules and considerations, only
that it must be "good" and responsive to the needs of its users.
Comment 15 Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-10 07:46:03 UTC
The problem with having translated explanations on all 
the wikis is the duplication - see bug 3916 and bug 
3917.
Comment 16 Rob Church 2005-11-10 12:28:39 UTC
How is it duplicating to have different language versions of the same
explanation on different projects? English explanation != French explanation in
terms of language or grammar, hence the texts differ, hence the information is
not the same - ergo, it is not duplication.
Comment 17 Brian Jason Drake 2005-11-15 10:40:08 UTC
(In reply to comment #16)
> How is it duplicating to have different language 
versions of the sameexplanation on different projects? 
English explanation != French explanation interms of 
language or grammar, hence the texts differ, hence the 
information isnot the same - ergo, it is not 
duplication.

I meant, for example, that having the same explanation 
on the French Wikipedia and the French Wiktionary is 
duplication.
Comment 18 Rob Church 2005-11-15 14:32:32 UTC
Unavoidable. You've completely skipped past the point you were trying to make
filing this request. Individual wikis can add, at the consensus of their
communities, links to whatever the hell they like on their sidebars. It's not a
development issue and never was.

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.


Navigation
Links