Last modified: 2011-03-13 18:05:35 UTC

Wikimedia Bugzilla is closed!

Wikimedia migrated from Bugzilla to Phabricator. Bug reports are handled in Wikimedia Phabricator.
This static website is read-only and for historical purposes. It is not possible to log in and except for displaying bug reports and their history, links might be broken. See T13461, the corresponding Phabricator task for complete and up-to-date bug report information.
Bug 11461 - Remove deprecated extAddSpecialPage
Remove deprecated extAddSpecialPage
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
General/Unknown (Other open bugs)
unspecified
All All
: Lowest normal (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
: patch, patch-need-review
Depends on:
Blocks:
  Show dependency treegraph
 
Reported: 2007-09-26 17:28 UTC by Victor Vasiliev
Modified: 2011-03-13 18:05 UTC (History)
1 user (show)

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


Attachments
Proposed patch (2.68 KB, patch)
2007-09-26 17:28 UTC, Victor Vasiliev
Details

Description Victor Vasiliev 2007-09-26 17:28:14 UTC
Created attachment 4160 [details]
Proposed patch

I think old version is not longer needed.
Comment 1 Rob Church 2007-09-26 18:41:22 UTC
This will break the compatibility layer for all old MediaWiki installations and any extensions relying upon them.
Comment 2 Victor Vasiliev 2007-09-27 03:16:32 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> This will break the compatibility layer for all old MediaWiki installations and
> any extensions relying upon them.
> 

You think? Actually, do we need extensions for old MW versions? People, who need them, just have to switch to older SVN revision
Comment 3 Aaron Schulz 2007-09-27 03:55:53 UTC
Trying to dig through the revisions is too much of a pain.

We did start branching extensions. But I don't know how well the backporting et all will be, so I'd take that with a grain of salt. Also, some extensions are not on SVN.
Comment 4 Rob Church 2007-09-27 08:55:48 UTC
I do not see any benefit in breaking a perfectly good compatibility layer, nor do I condone gratuitous breakage of backwards compatibility.
Comment 5 Brion Vibber 2007-09-28 15:28:03 UTC
I strongly recommend against using ExtensionFunctions.php as it's a pain in the ass. Extensions should be self-sufficient.
Comment 6 Aaron Schulz 2007-09-28 15:44:42 UTC
(In reply to comment #5)
> I strongly recommend against using ExtensionFunctions.php as it's a pain in the
> ass. Extensions should be self-sufficient.
> 

I'd have to agree, I've seen floods of "this doesn't work" threads and IRC complaints because of this.
Comment 7 Rob Church 2007-09-28 16:23:08 UTC
I don't disagree with comment #5; what I object to is breaking the compatibility layer for those extensions which currently *do* use it, which includes third party extensions we don't maintain.
Comment 8 Aaron Schulz 2007-09-28 16:48:14 UTC
(In reply to comment #7)
> I don't disagree with comment #5; what I object to is breaking the
> compatibility layer for those extensions which currently *do* use it, which
> includes third party extensions we don't maintain.
> 

Yeah, I mentioned that in #3. We should leave extension functions alone. Rather, just replace all uses of it on SVN.

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


Navigation
Links