Making SMW semver.org compliant

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
10 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Making SMW semver.org compliant

Jeroen De Dauw-2
Hey,

I think it would be nice if SMW was http://semver.org/ compliant.

This means version numbers would look like MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH with a possible stability suffix. This is very close to what we are already doing, except that we are sticking a "1." in front of it. Having this shifted by one might not be confusing to people familiar with the SMW release cycle, though might be surprising to those who are not.

How about switching to this schema for out next major release, which would then end up being 2.0?

If we make this switch, the next major release seems like the best point to do this. Coincidentally one advantage to picking this release for such a change is that it makes us skip 1.10, which some users might think is smaller than 1.9.0.

Cheers

--
Jeroen De Dauw
http://www.bn2vs.com
Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

Yaron Koren-2
Hi,

It sounds like your real question is, "Shouldn't we have changed to 2.0 already?" :) I don't know the answer to that, but I can't imagine anyone would object to increasing the version number to 2.0, 3.0 etc. if/when it makes sense to do that.

(I don't think avoiding a 1.10, 1.11 etc. is by itself a good-enough reason to jump to the next number - although I may be guilty of sometimes doing that when setting version numbers for my own extensions - but anyway, ideally there are enough large-scale improvements to accompany the small ones that this sort of thing doesn't often become an issue.)


On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Jeroen De Dauw <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey,

I think it would be nice if SMW was http://semver.org/ compliant.

This means version numbers would look like MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH with a possible stability suffix. This is very close to what we are already doing, except that we are sticking a "1." in front of it. Having this shifted by one might not be confusing to people familiar with the SMW release cycle, though might be surprising to those who are not.

How about switching to this schema for out next major release, which would then end up being 2.0?

If we make this switch, the next major release seems like the best point to do this. Coincidentally one advantage to picking this release for such a change is that it makes us skip 1.10, which some users might think is smaller than 1.9.0.

Cheers

--
Jeroen De Dauw
http://www.bn2vs.com
Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel




--
WikiWorks · MediaWiki Consulting · http://wikiworks.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

Jeroen De Dauw-2
Hey,

> increasing the version number to 2.0, 3.0 etc. if/when it makes sense to do that.

The thing is that we have not been doing this. Some of our last major releases contained big breaking changes (DataItems, SQLStore3, Composer, etc), and we did not increment the primary number. I do not expect to ever have changes that are significantly more disruptive than those for any future release.

> I don't think avoiding a 1.10, 1.11 etc. is by itself a good-enough reason to jump to the next number

Agreed. This is a weak argument for picking the next release to make the change if we decide to do so. It is not an argument for making the change itself. (In fact, you cannot reason like that if you stick to semver.)

Cheers

--
Jeroen De Dauw
http://www.bn2vs.com
Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

Yury Katkov
In reply to this post by Yaron Koren-2
Hi everyone!

I find myself difficult to understand the notion of MAJOR in semver.org :

> MAJOR version when you make incompatible API changes

IMHO MAJOR version - is when the amount of new stable tested features
reach some threshold, or when some key characteristics of the software
become significantly better (e.g. SMW 2.0 works 400% faster). See this
list for more examples of stuff that I think can be the reason for
increasing any version of SMW. [1]  The API incompatibility is just a
drawback, the inevitable evil which surely should be introduced with
the version. Since the versioning is related not only with programming
but also with marketing, I think it's strange to make API
incompatibilities the major factor for increasing the version number.

[1] http://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/SMW_users_survey_results#Development_priorities
-----
Yury Katkov, WikiVote



On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 12:11 AM, Yaron Koren <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> It sounds like your real question is, "Shouldn't we have changed to 2.0
> already?" :) I don't know the answer to that, but I can't imagine anyone
> would object to increasing the version number to 2.0, 3.0 etc. if/when it
> makes sense to do that.
>
> (I don't think avoiding a 1.10, 1.11 etc. is by itself a good-enough reason
> to jump to the next number - although I may be guilty of sometimes doing
> that when setting version numbers for my own extensions - but anyway,
> ideally there are enough large-scale improvements to accompany the small
> ones that this sort of thing doesn't often become an issue.)
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:34 PM, Jeroen De Dauw <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Hey,
>>
>> I think it would be nice if SMW was http://semver.org/ compliant.
>>
>> This means version numbers would look like MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH with a
>> possible stability suffix. This is very close to what we are already doing,
>> except that we are sticking a "1." in front of it. Having this shifted by
>> one might not be confusing to people familiar with the SMW release cycle,
>> though might be surprising to those who are not.
>>
>> How about switching to this schema for out next major release, which would
>> then end up being 2.0?
>>
>> If we make this switch, the next major release seems like the best point
>> to do this. Coincidentally one advantage to picking this release for such a
>> change is that it makes us skip 1.10, which some users might think is
>> smaller than 1.9.0.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> --
>> Jeroen De Dauw
>> http://www.bn2vs.com
>> Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
>> --
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
>> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
>> Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
>> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
>>
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>> _______________________________________________
>> Semediawiki-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
>>
>
>
>
> --
> WikiWorks · MediaWiki Consulting · http://wikiworks.com
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
> Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Semediawiki-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
>

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

Jeroen De Dauw-2
Hey Yury,

In case of MINOR versions, people know no compatibility breaks where made. This means all versions of MediaWiki and PHP that where supported before are still supported. It also means that no features where removed from SMW, and that existing ones where not modified in such a way that old wikitext will break. Those things can only happen in MAJOR versions. This is a big help to people using the software in determining if and when they should upgrade. Development related compatibility is also part of the picture, though since our primary audience are the users, not developers, that really comes second.

Cheers

--
Jeroen De Dauw
http://www.bn2vs.com
Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

Markus Krötzsch-2
In reply to this post by Jeroen De Dauw-2
Hi,

+1 to dropping the initial "1." that will never ever change.

However, since the 1 was unchanged since we are out of beta, it seems to
me that we are currently treating the second number as our major
version. In other words, we are at version 9.0.1 and the next version
should be 10.0.0. This is a bit like what was done for Java ;-).

I don't think users will be overly confused or upset in any case. Having
more relevant first digits will certainly be good for clarity.

Cheers,

Markus

On 16/01/14 20:34, Jeroen De Dauw wrote:

> Hey,
>
> I think it would be nice if SMW was http://semver.org/ compliant.
>
> This means version numbers would look like MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH with a
> possible stability suffix. This is very close to what we are already
> doing, except that we are sticking a "1." in front of it. Having this
> shifted by one might not be confusing to people familiar with the SMW
> release cycle, though might be surprising to those who are not.
>
> How about switching to this schema for out next major release, which
> would then end up being 2.0?
>
> If we make this switch, the next major release seems like the best point
> to do this. Coincidentally one advantage to picking this release for
> such a change is that it makes us skip 1.10, which some users might
> think is smaller than 1.9.0.
>
> Cheers
>
> --
> Jeroen De Dauw
> http://www.bn2vs.com
> Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
> --
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
> Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Semediawiki-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

planetenxin
+1 for using the semver.org definitions. This is especially important in
managed (enterprise) IT environments (ITIL...) where major changes
triggers different processes. It is also important to tag all
extensions. This is very often not the case yet...

/Alexander

Am 17.01.2014 10:41, schrieb Markus Krötzsch:

> Hi,
>
> +1 to dropping the initial "1." that will never ever change.
>
> However, since the 1 was unchanged since we are out of beta, it seems to
> me that we are currently treating the second number as our major
> version. In other words, we are at version 9.0.1 and the next version
> should be 10.0.0. This is a bit like what was done for Java ;-).
>
> I don't think users will be overly confused or upset in any case. Having
> more relevant first digits will certainly be good for clarity.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Markus
>
> On 16/01/14 20:34, Jeroen De Dauw wrote:
>> Hey,
>>
>> I think it would be nice if SMW was http://semver.org/ compliant.
>>
>> This means version numbers would look like MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH with a
>> possible stability suffix. This is very close to what we are already
>> doing, except that we are sticking a "1." in front of it. Having this
>> shifted by one might not be confusing to people familiar with the SMW
>> release cycle, though might be surprising to those who are not.
>>
>> How about switching to this schema for out next major release, which
>> would then end up being 2.0?
>>
>> If we make this switch, the next major release seems like the best point
>> to do this. Coincidentally one advantage to picking this release for
>> such a change is that it makes us skip 1.10, which some users might
>> think is smaller than 1.9.0.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> --
>> Jeroen De Dauw
>> http://www.bn2vs.com
>> Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
>> --
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
>> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
>> Critical Workloads, Development Environments&  Everything In Between.
>> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Semediawiki-devel mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
> Critical Workloads, Development Environments&  Everything In Between.
> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Semediawiki-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
>


--
________________________________________________
semantic::apps by gesinn.it
Business Applications with Semantic Mediawiki.
http://semantic-apps.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

Jeroen De Dauw-2
In reply to this post by Markus Krötzsch-2
Hey,

> Markus:
> the next version should be 10.0.0

Good point. +1 to this.

> Alexander:
> It is also important to tag all extensions. This is very often not the case yet...

At least for SMW you can be sure all future releases will be tagged, since Composer essentially requires one to tag in order to create a release. The same is also true for SRF and Maps, and I hope more extensions will follow.

> Yaron:
> I can't imagine anyone would object to increasing the version number to 2.0, 3.0 etc. if/when it makes sense to do that.

A discussion about the same question occurred quite some time back on wikitech. As you can probably guess, the outcome was rather different.

Cheers

--
Jeroen De Dauw
http://www.bn2vs.com
Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

Yaron Koren-2
Hi,

Markus - are you suggesting retroactively referring to, say, version 1.5.1 as version 5.1 - with a corresponding change to all the documentation, etc.? Or just jumping straight from version 1.9 to version 10.0? I'm assuming the latter, but in either case that seems like a bad idea, that will in fact cause confusion, without any obvious benefit.

Yes, Java did it, but, as Wikipedia notes [1], that was strictly for marketing purposes, presumably because "Java 6" looks a lot nicer on a book cover than "Java 1.6". Behind the scenes, Java developers still refer to it as 1.6, etc. When the first "SMW Unleashed" book comes out, then maybe it makes sense to start talking about making the number look nicer. :)

I think it's overly dramatic to say that SMW versioning will never move past 1.x. There are a few previous versions that could have merited a jump to 2.0, in my opinion - the most recent two, 1.8 and 1.9, being obvious candidates. Perhaps it was a mistake to not make the major number jump with either of them. (And by the way, maybe it's not too late to rename 1.9 to 2.0? It's only been out for two weeks now...) But trying to pretend that those *were* major version number changes seems like it would cause more problems than it's worth.

Jeroen - the numbering decisions of the developers of core MediaWiki seem irrelevant to this discussion, I would think.


-Yaron


On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Jeroen De Dauw <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hey,

> Markus:
> the next version should be 10.0.0

Good point. +1 to this.

> Alexander:

> It is also important to tag all extensions. This is very often not the case yet...

At least for SMW you can be sure all future releases will be tagged, since Composer essentially requires one to tag in order to create a release. The same is also true for SRF and Maps, and I hope more extensions will follow.

> Yaron:
> I can't imagine anyone would object to increasing the version number to 2.0, 3.0 etc. if/when it makes sense to do that.

A discussion about the same question occurred quite some time back on wikitech. As you can probably guess, the outcome was rather different.

Cheers

--
Jeroen De Dauw
http://www.bn2vs.com
Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel




--
WikiWorks · MediaWiki Consulting · http://wikiworks.com

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Making SMW semver.org compliant

Markus Krötzsch-2
On 17/01/14 15:09, Yaron Koren wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Markus - are you suggesting retroactively referring to, say, version
> 1.5.1 as version 5.1 - with a corresponding change to all the
> documentation, etc.? Or just jumping straight from version 1.9 to
> version 10.0? I'm assuming the latter, but in either case that seems
> like a bad idea, that will in fact cause confusion, without any obvious
> benefit.
>
> Yes, Java did it, but, as Wikipedia notes [1], that was strictly for
> marketing purposes, presumably because "Java 6" looks a lot nicer on a
> book cover than "Java 1.6". Behind the scenes, Java developers still
> refer to it as 1.6, etc. When the first "SMW Unleashed" book comes out,
> then maybe it makes sense to start talking about making the number look
> nicer. :)
>
> I think it's overly dramatic to say that SMW versioning will never move
> past 1.x. There are a few previous versions that could have merited a
> jump to 2.0, in my opinion - the most recent two, 1.8 and 1.9, being
> obvious candidates. Perhaps it was a mistake to not make the major
> number jump with either of them. (And by the way, maybe it's not too
> late to rename 1.9 to 2.0? It's only been out for two weeks now...) But
> trying to pretend that those *were* major version number changes seems
> like it would cause more problems than it's worth.

I was suggesting to use 10 as the next version, but to keep all old
releases (including 1.9) named as before; otherwise we would really
cause confusion (e.g. there are archived emails about those versions
that we cannot edit). However, the suggestion not to jump but to simply
leave away the initial "1." in the future. My reason was that the number
"9" seems to be our current major version, rather than a minor version
of major version "1". And if it is good enough for Java marketing, I
don't see a problem using it for SMW ;-)

Anyway, I won't fight for either option :-) Version 2.0 also sounds nice
in a way.

Cheers,

Markus

>
> Jeroen - the numbering decisions of the developers of core MediaWiki
> seem irrelevant to this discussion, I would think.
>
> [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Java_version_history
>
> -Yaron
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 8:59 AM, Jeroen De Dauw <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     Hey,
>
>      > Markus:
>      > the next version should be 10.0.0
>
>     Good point. +1 to this.
>
>      > Alexander:
>
>      > It is also important to tag all extensions. This is very often
>     not the case yet...
>
>     At least for SMW you can be sure all future releases will be tagged,
>     since Composer essentially requires one to tag in order to create a
>     release. The same is also true for SRF and Maps, and I hope more
>     extensions will follow.
>
>      > Yaron:
>      > I can't imagine anyone would object to increasing the version
>     number to 2.0, 3.0 etc. if/when it makes sense to do that.
>
>     A discussion about the same question occurred quite some time back
>     on wikitech. As you can probably guess, the outcome was rather
>     different.
>
>     Cheers
>
>     --
>     Jeroen De Dauw
>     http://www.bn2vs.com
>     Don't panic. Don't be evil. ~=[,,_,,]:3
>     --
>
>     ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>     CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
>     Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
>     Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
>     Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
>     http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>     _______________________________________________
>     Semediawiki-devel mailing list
>     [hidden email]
>     <mailto:[hidden email]>
>     https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
>
>
>
>
> --
> WikiWorks · MediaWiki Consulting · http://wikiworks.com
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
> Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Semediawiki-devel mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel
>


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Semediawiki-devel mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/semediawiki-devel