Last modified: 2011-02-08 21:56:51 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 26764 - ef* functions and $egVars to wf* functions and $wgVars
ef* functions and $egVars to wf* functions and $wgVars
Product: MediaWiki extensions
Classification: Unclassified
General/Unknown (Other open bugs)
All All
: Normal minor (vote)
: ---
Assigned To: Nobody - You can work on this!
Depends on:
Blocks: code_quality
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2011-01-16 23:39 UTC by Krinkle
Modified: 2011-02-08 21:56 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

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


Description Krinkle 2011-01-16 23:39:01 UTC
Per r70755 commit summary.

See also:
* "function ef *"[0] in /trunk as of 16 January 2011 21:13 (UTC).
* "$eg *"[1]  in /trunk as of 16 January 2011 21:13 (UTC).

Comment 1 Bawolff (Brian Wolff) 2011-01-16 23:41:28 UTC
As long as its consistent within an extension, does it really matter?
Comment 2 Krinkle 2011-01-17 01:13:38 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> As long as its consistent within an extension, does it really matter?

Yep, It's not that big a deal (lowering priority). But to avoid confusion new extensions should follow the Conventions[0] and existing extensions made consistent.

Comment 3 Tim Starling 2011-01-17 01:30:24 UTC
Please do not change any existing global variable names. It's not worth breaking backwards compatibility. 

New extensions should follow the conventions, but you can't file a bug against an extension that hasn't been written yet.
Comment 4 Sam Reed (reedy) 2011-01-17 05:26:34 UTC
Certainly (I haven't looked), if it's not well documented that it "should" or is more "preferred" to be written like this, that is worth addressing.

Yay, bug 1...

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