Last modified: 2014-05-12 06:57:09 UTC
Just noticed. *Please*, not yet another product (and with an obnoxious name even)... If "Wikimedia Labs" really can't bear some more components, just merge it to "Tools" product. It has only one component now so it's easy, better now than later.
I agree that having "Tools", "Tool Labs tools", and "Wikimedia Labs" is confusing.
See bug 48327. Labs (official infrastructure) and Tools (community-maintained tools hosted on Labs) are two very separate things to me. Feel free to also discuss with Coren. But I agree that the product name is unfortunate...
(In reply to comment #2) > See bug 48327. Labs (official infrastructure) and Tools (community-maintained > tools hosted on Labs) are two very separate things to me. The current definition of Wikimedia Labs > (other) is a superset of Tool Labs. Anyway, Tools product is perfect home.
Another aspect: Maybe current "Tools" should be renamed to "Misc". Which is also a bad name but less confusing with Wikimedia-specific terminology. The Bugzilla product called "Tools" predates the existence of WM Labs and its Tool Labs. Tempted to rename this ticket to "Wikimedia Labs" vs "Tool Labs tools" vs "Tools" product confusion
(In reply to comment #4) > Another aspect: Maybe current "Tools" should be renamed to "Misc". > Which is also a bad name but less confusing with Wikimedia-specific > terminology. The Bugzilla product called "Tools" predates the existence of WM > Labs and its Tool Labs. > > Tempted to rename this ticket to > "Wikimedia Labs" vs "Tool Labs tools" vs "Tools" product confusion Agreed on all counts. :) "Misc" is ok and it can also serve as product for Tool Labs tools if they are not wanted in Wikimedia Labs product.
Ugh, "Misc". I'd still like to take a(n) holistic at bug categorization, rather than slapping lipstick on the pig.
Feel free to propose something better. :)
Looking at https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/describecomponents.cgi?product=Tools I retriaged the open tickets under "Tools > [Other]" and created a new separate "morebots" component (especially as tickets might be moved to a different product as per bug 52069). For remaining components under the "Tools" Bugzilla product, external links how to file bug reports would have to be updated if we renamed "Tools" to "Misc" or so (to avoid confusion with Labs Tools). Affected pages that needed updated links, from a quick search: * http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/PhotoCommons#Bugs_.2F_Feature_requests * https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:MWDumper#Reporting_bugs * https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:VIAF_inter_project_linking * https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WM-Bot#Support * Vagrant: * * https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki-Vagrant#Bugs * * https://www.ohloh.net/p/mediawiki-vagrant * * https://github.com/wikimedia/mediawiki-vagrant
(In reply to comment #5) > it can also serve as product for Tool Labs tools if they are > not wanted in Wikimedia Labs product. Problem is that Bugzilla only allows classifications (currently not used), products (Wikimedia Labs) and components (like tools on Tool labs). There's nothing below that, so we couldn't auto-CC or auto-assign tickets for all those tools on Tool Labs automatically. Hence IMHO it requires a product on its own to not make "getting attention of developers" a manual PITA.
Bug 53986 is a very unfortunate consequence of filing this bug, I feel guilty. :( At some point we'll be forced to make stuff more complex using classifications, to sort out this mess. (In reply to comment #9) > Problem is that Bugzilla only allows classifications (currently not used), > products (Wikimedia Labs) and components (like tools on Tool labs). There's > nothing below that, so we couldn't auto-CC or auto-assign tickets for all > those > tools on Tool Labs automatically. Hence IMHO it requires a product on its own > to not make "getting attention of developers" a manual PITA. I don't understand. Tool Labs would not be a component, the individual tools (or groups of tools e.g. magnustools) would. Tool Labs as a whole has its components under Wikimedia Labs product.
I filed three dependencies to improve the situation the "Tools" product (and products in general), just to start: * Bug 54061: Move QRPedia to "Tools" product * Bug 54062: Move Huggle under "Tools" product * Bug 54063: Close or move Cortado product None of these requires changing the name of the product to "Misc", while moving the current components of "Tool Labs tools" product is probably easier if the new product has a similar name. So I suggest we change the name of the product later.
Just to give quick feedback: Yes, I want to start using classifications, and at least evaluate it still in this calendar year. I'm reluctant to move all extensions one level up, not because it wouldn't make sense, but because it would be an extreme amount of work via the UI (if nobody pops up with awesome SQL skills). So I won't work on the tickets mentioned in comment 11 right away, because comment 6 (refering to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Bugzilla_taxonomy ) / bug 38990 is simply true. I need to spend a few evenings with some beers and a paper printout of Bugzilla's product/component structure and pick up thoughts on potential categorizations (e.g. "Editing helper applications" or something for Huggle and pywikipedia?). I simply don't want to move stuff twice, but I am also aware that in history, "trying to do it right" often ends up in doing nothing. (In reply to comment #10) > "Tool Labs" would not be a component, the individual tools > (or groups of tools e.g. "magnustools") would. "Tool Labs" as a whole has its > components under "Wikimedia Labs" product. Hmm. So as per comment 3 and comment 10 you propose Wikimedia Labs > $tool on Tool Labs instead of current Tool Labs tools > $tool on Tool Labs ? I'm undecided.
"Tools" was for anything under svn:/trunk/tools (eg: styleize.php), We should probably rename it to something more suitable for the current git eqv, but it has taken a different direction recently. We could probably use something like "MediaWiki Utilities" in the mean time till we define a solid scope for it.
Thanks for the reply. (In reply to comment #12) > [...] I simply don't want to move stuff twice, but I am also aware > that in history, "trying to do it right" often ends up in doing nothing. The three products mentioned above are quite small (or minuscule even) and won't be a problem in this respect. However, they are also not a blocker for "Tool labs" product moves. So yes, please let's not be stuck until the final reorganisation happens. > > (In reply to comment #10) > > "Tool Labs" would not be a component, the individual tools > > (or groups of tools e.g. "magnustools") would. "Tool Labs" as a whole has its > > components under "Wikimedia Labs" product. > > Hmm. So as per comment 3 and comment 10 you propose > Wikimedia Labs > $tool on Tool Labs > instead of current > Tool Labs tools > $tool on Tool Labs > ? I'm undecided. I'm not sure what you mean here. :( If you mean moving "Tool Labs tools" components to "Wikimedia Labs" as they are, and add new components there for each future tool, no, it's not what I proposed but it's also an option. My proposal was to place components relating to Tool Labs as infrastructure under Wikimedia Labs product, and to place components about individual tools (i.e. the things which would be listed in [[mw:Toolserver/List_of_Tools]]; of course not each of them with an individual component) under the "Tools" product, effectively merging "Tool Labs tools" to "Tools" product, minus the bugs which shouldn't be there.
I just killed the "dbzip2" component in "Tools" by moving its one valid and closed ticket to "Datasets". https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/describecomponents.cgi?product=Tools Trying to break this into actionable subtasks: * grabbers (1 ticket): Added in bug 55351 but as long as it's not an extension I am tempted to throw it into the "Wikimedia>General/Unknown" waters. * WM-Bot (33): We have "wikibugs IRC bot" already under "Wikimedia", so WM-Bot could also go into its component under "Wikimedia". I've always been confused how dispersed our IRC related Bugzilla components are. * mwdumper (44): This is somehow Datasets related so could become a component under "Datasets"? Harder parts: * code-utils (4 tickets): PHP stuff. Can't see a good fit somewhere else. * PhotoCommons-WP (9), VIAF (13): Some external tools, not sure how actively maintained * [other] (20, two open): Random and mostly misfiled stuff. Theoretically could be dumped into "Wikimedia>General/Unknown" or such. If we cannot or do not want to move stuff somewhere else, I'd propose renaming "Tools" to "Utilities".
Yes to all the component moves above. Thanks for proposing them! (In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #15) > * code-utils (4 tickets): > PHP stuff. Can't see a good fit somewhere else. Can go in MediaWiki>General and be triaged from there. > * PhotoCommons-WP (9), VIAF (13): > Some external tools, not sure how actively maintained All these can be moved to Tool Labs tools>[other] or live there as components: they can or should be migrated there anyway at some point. > * [other] (20, two open): > Random and mostly misfiled stuff. Theoretically could be dumped into > "Wikimedia>General/Unknown" or such. Yes, Wikimedia>General will do and they can find more specific homes later.
So, what is stopping the immediate merge of "Tools" and "Tool Labs tools"? I feel stupid every time I need to file a bug in one of the two.
(In reply to Nemo from comment #17) > So, what is stopping the immediate merge of "Tools" and "Tool Labs tools"? They are two different things: one is random stuff, the other are tools on Tool Labs.
(In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #18) > They are two different things: one is random stuff, the other are tools on > Tool Labs. Sure. But do they *need* to be different/separated?
(In reply to Nemo from comment #19) > Sure. But do they *need* to be different/separated? Random local tools for PHP quality in MediaWiki and a webservice running on Wikimedia wiki content are very different things to me.
(In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #20) > (In reply to Nemo from comment #19) > > Sure. But do they *need* to be different/separated? > > Random local tools for PHP quality in MediaWiki and a webservice running on > Wikimedia wiki content are very different things to me. Different in what way?
I decided to rename the Bugzilla product "Tools" to "Utilities". Considering the increasing importance of tools on Tool Labs compared to the tools listed under "Tools", and after triaging two more tickets under "Tools" that should have gone to "Wikimedia Labs/tools" or "Tool Labs Tools" instead, this seems like the best solution currently. I've updated links that I'm aware of (see comment 8) accordingly. I'm closing as WORKSFORME as from my POV, as the summary of this ticket (confusion between "Tools" and "Tool labs tools") can be considered solved now. Might reevaluate if we receive further incorrectly placed tickets.
(In reply to Nemo from comment #21) > (In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #20) > > (In reply to Nemo from comment #19) > > > Sure. But do they *need* to be different/separated? > > > > Random local tools for PHP quality in MediaWiki and a webservice running on > > Wikimedia wiki content are very different things to me. > > Different in what way? Different as apples and oranges. You can put them all under "Fruit" though, if you like it untidy. :)
I don't see how using a synonym helps, but "Wikimedia Labs" vs. "Tool Labs tools" was not addressed anyway. (In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #22) > Considering the increasing importance of tools on Tool Labs compared to the > tools listed under "Tools" Ah, so you're talking of importance. Usually the things listed in "Tools" were considered more important because they are from the MediaWiki devs. However, if you consider them less important now, it should be even easier to merge this product to another.
(In reply to Nemo from comment #24) > I don't see how using a synonym helps, but "Wikimedia Labs" vs. "Tool Labs > tools" was not addressed anyway. Could you clarify what the actual problem to solve is, and what your proposal is (keep in mind that tools on Tool Labs would like to have subcomponents in Bugzilla hence it needs to be a product)? https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/describecomponents.cgi?product=Wikimedia%20Labs says for "Wikimedia Labs/tools": "Issue tracker for the tools.wmflabs.org infrastructure itself. Note: Issues with tools running on Tool Labs should be filed under "Tool Labs tools"." https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/describecomponents.cgi?product=Tool%20labs%20tools says: "Issues with the Tool Labs infrastructure itself should be filed under "Wikimedia Labs→tools". "
(In reply to Andre Klapper from comment #25) > Could you clarify what the actual problem to solve is, Sure: > I agree that having "Tools", "Tool Labs tools", and "Wikimedia Labs" is > confusing. > and what your > proposal is Simple: (from comment #0) > just merge it I don't see any obstacle to merging "Tool Labs tools" and "Utilities"; additionally, all "Tool Labs tools" could be components of "Wikimedia Labs"; finally, if both are implemented, it's trivial to rename "Wikimedia Labs" to "Wikimedia Labs and other tools".
>> I agree that having "Tools", "Tool Labs tools", and "Wikimedia Labs" is >> confusing. ...and that's not the case anymore now hence my question still stands. I don't see an advantage in that proposal compared to the current situation as tools on Tool Labs are something different and way more specific than https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/describecomponents.cgi?product=Wikimedia%20Labs , hence proposing to set WORKSFORME again here. Or WONTFIX if that's more appropriate. If Bugzilla supported more levels than product/component I'd support "Wikimedia Labs > Tools > whatever-toolname", but that's not the case.
