Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

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

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

MZMcBride-2
Platonides wrote:

>On 19/03/13 00:54, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
>> Oh, and I noticed that you have some OTRS expertise -- could you maybe
>> check out https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22622 and let
>> us know if you have some free time to volunteer your help? :-)
>
>Is it really something where volunteers can help? I thought it wasn't
>possible (private mail concerns blocking volunteer action).
>
>BTW, why is WMF looking for a WordPress Developer? I think that if we
>outgrew the current blog, the way to go would be to mediawikize it, not
>to make something new still based in WP.

Owwww. It kind of stings to read
<http://hire.jobvite.com/Jobvite/Job.aspx?j=ou3gXfwu>, apparently a
position listing from the Legal and Community Advocacy team, looking for a
WordPress contractor to do a face-lift for the Wikimedia blog, when OTRS
is struggling to stay functional. I don't do much OTRS-related work, but
I find it easy to imagine some OTRS volunteers reading this and wondering
what's going on.

MZMcBride



_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

Jay Walsh
On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 3:35 PM, MZMcBride <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Platonides wrote:
>>On 19/03/13 00:54, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
>>> Oh, and I noticed that you have some OTRS expertise -- could you maybe
>>> check out https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22622 and let
>>> us know if you have some free time to volunteer your help? :-)
>>
>>Is it really something where volunteers can help? I thought it wasn't
>>possible (private mail concerns blocking volunteer action).
>>
>>BTW, why is WMF looking for a WordPress Developer? I think that if we
>>outgrew the current blog, the way to go would be to mediawikize it, not
>>to make something new still based in WP.
>
> Owwww. It kind of stings to read
> <http://hire.jobvite.com/Jobvite/Job.aspx?j=ou3gXfwu>, apparently a
> position listing from the Legal and Community Advocacy team, looking for a
> WordPress contractor to do a face-lift for the Wikimedia blog, when OTRS
> is struggling to stay functional. I don't do much OTRS-related work, but
> I find it easy to imagine some OTRS volunteers reading this and wondering
> what's going on.
>
> MZMcBride

Hi MZ - I don't disagree with the points about OTRS. I don't know the
software/interface well and can't speak to the resources needed to
address it, but I can speak to the wordpress post.

To be clear, this is really intended to be a super short-term work
contract. It's not a regular job, and not even part time. We've
budgeted a small amount of money for this work, and most of that is to
implement the updated designs that we've had for a while, which are
focused on showcasing a wider number of topic areas, more multilingual
posts, and more involvement from the community.

We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or
at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a
wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd
like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be
used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of
using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that.

--
Jay Walsh
Senior Director, Communications
WikimediaFoundation.org
blog.wikimedia.org
+1 (415) 839 6885 x 6609, @jansonw

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

Daniel Zahn-2
In reply to this post by MZMcBride-2
>>BTW, why is WMF looking for a WordPress Developer?

So is it just design or is it developing? If it is actual software
development, i'd have to think
who is going to review and maintain that code after the super
short-term contractor is gone.
Remember it also has to be deployed to production somehow and  i'd
already like to point out now
that it should have reviews from other devs, not just asking ops to
merge it, especially with Wordpress'
history of exploits.

--
Daniel Zahn <[hidden email]>
Operations Engineer

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

K. Peachey-2
In reply to this post by Jay Walsh
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
> We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or
> at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a
> wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd
> like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be
> used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of
> using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that.

MediaWiki + LQT (or the likes) for the comments and you are basically
there. In addition you have less to worry about in regards to the
WordpRess exploits (as pointed out by Daniel) and you open up to a
whole new ecocycle of developers we already have.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

Terry Chay
In reply to this post by Daniel Zahn-2
Daniel,

On Mar 19, 2013, at 6:33 PM, Daniel Zahn <[hidden email]> wrote:

>>> BTW, why is WMF looking for a WordPress Developer?
>
> So is it just design or is it developing? If it is actual software
> development, i'd have to think
> who is going to review and maintain that code after the super
> short-term contractor is gone.

The changes to the plugins and themes that would happen (have happenend) are and would continue to be in gerrit code review. Communications wants to simply update existing install, and while I can review, I don't really have time to code (or if I code, I can't self-review).

This would most likely be in the form of an update of the existing custom plugin and a new theme (to replace Victor).

> Remember it also has to be deployed to production somehow and  i'd
> already like to point out now
> that it should have reviews from other devs, not just asking ops to
> merge it, especially with Wordpress'
> history of exploits.

The blog is already deployed in production (by you and RobH), so I assume you've firewalled it already as much as possible, so the main concern if exploited would would be privacy leak from *.wikimedia.org

As for updating it, I'm open to ideas on how we can handle this. I can ask around in Features for someone willing to help. Right now the process is ad hoc and ends up being a pain to keep up to date from Ops's side (basically someone notices the plugins and core are out of date and requests an update).
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

Terry Chay
In reply to this post by K. Peachey-2

On Mar 19, 2013, at 7:06 PM, "K. Peachey" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or
>> at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a
>> wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd
>> like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be
>> used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of
>> using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that.
>
> MediaWiki + LQT (or the likes) for the comments and you are basically
> there. In addition you have less to worry about in regards to the
> WordpRess exploits (as pointed out by Daniel) and you open up to a
> whole new ecocycle of developers we already have.

That's an interesting idea (after all, WordPress and MediaWiki's are redundant CMSs), and it would fix some annoying issues of the blog workflow (signon for commenting/publishing, and the redundant cycle comm takes on drafting on wiki and translating for WordPress), but it sounds like a larger scope of work than a temporary WordPress contractor (and a longer review cycle). I can't commit that much resources out of Features for anything beyond reviews of tweaks to the blog and Communications budget for developing this is very modest.

Are you suggesting that we add this to next fiscal year's plan and repurpose one of our teams for this? Right now I'm assuming the priorities of Visual Editor, Parsoid, Editor Engagement (Echo, Flow), and E3 take precedence and are pretty much set well into 2013-14. If I had extra room, I'd probably prioritize global profile and affiliations/wikiprojects support moving the blog to MediaWiki. :-(


terry chay  최태리
Director of Features Engineering
Wikimedia Foundation
“Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. That's our commitment.”

p: +1 (415) 839-6885 x6832
m: +1 (408) 480-8902
e: [hidden email]
i: http://terrychay.com/
w: http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Tychay
aim: terrychay

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

David Gerard-2
In reply to this post by K. Peachey-2
On 20 March 2013 02:06, K. Peachey <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:

>> We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or
>> at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a
>> wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd
>> like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be
>> used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of
>> using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that.

> MediaWiki + LQT (or the likes) for the comments and you are basically
> there. In addition you have less to worry about in regards to the
> WordpRess exploits (as pointed out by Daniel) and you open up to a
> whole new ecocycle of developers we already have.


Cobbling together blog software is a one-man project; having a
versatile, well-maintained and mature blog engine with ubiquitous
third-party support is another matter. You could turn WordPress into
an encyclopedia CMS too, but it would be well below optimum.

WordPress has all manner of problems (I am painfully aware of this, I
have to hit it with a hammer in my day job) but it is basically the
best available for the job. MediaWiki has all manner of problems (you
are painfully aware of this, I'm certain) but, similarly, there's
nothing better for the job.

It's possible we could do better with something adapted, but not from
MediaWiki. For one thing, WordPress's visual editor works ...


- d.


- d.

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

Isarra Yos
On the other hand, how hard could it be to just write an extension to
integrate a wordpress database and interface into a mediawiki? Call it a
new namespace on the mediawiki end, and... uh... horrible things on the
wordpress end...

I was going to say that if I had enough spare time I could probably pull
that off, but putting this down in text it now occurs to me how utterly
insane that is, especially considering how hard a time I had just making
my own wordpress and mediawiki installs look the same.

Even so, it definitely could be done, and it'd probably be easier to
maintain and update than making something from scratch. I mean, they're
both php, with somewhat similar structures...

On 20/03/13 18:57, David Gerard wrote:

> On 20 March 2013 02:06, K. Peachey <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 9:20 AM, Jay Walsh <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> We're really interested in wiki-fying the blog at some point too, or
>>> at least marrying more of the technologies. I'd love to us to use a
>>> wiki-based system, but that's a bit further down the pipeline. I'd
>>> like to see us incorporate SUL so Wikimedia project usernames could be
>>> used for comments and posting. I think that will be a question of
>>> using our very limited resources, but I'm super interested in that.
>> MediaWiki + LQT (or the likes) for the comments and you are basically
>> there. In addition you have less to worry about in regards to the
>> WordpRess exploits (as pointed out by Daniel) and you open up to a
>> whole new ecocycle of developers we already have.
>
> Cobbling together blog software is a one-man project; having a
> versatile, well-maintained and mature blog engine with ubiquitous
> third-party support is another matter. You could turn WordPress into
> an encyclopedia CMS too, but it would be well below optimum.
>
> WordPress has all manner of problems (I am painfully aware of this, I
> have to hit it with a hammer in my day job) but it is basically the
> best available for the job. MediaWiki has all manner of problems (you
> are painfully aware of this, I'm certain) but, similarly, there's
> nothing better for the job.
>
> It's possible we could do better with something adapted, but not from
> MediaWiki. For one thing, WordPress's visual editor works ...
>
>
> - d.
>
>
> - d.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l


--
-— Isarra


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

James Alexander-4
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Isarra Yos <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On the other hand, how hard could it be to just write an extension to
> integrate a wordpress database and interface into a mediawiki? Call it a
> new namespace on the mediawiki end, and... uh... horrible things on the
> wordpress end...
>
> I was going to say that if I had enough spare time I could probably pull
> that off, but putting this down in text it now occurs to me how utterly
> insane that is, especially considering how hard a time I had just making my
> own wordpress and mediawiki installs look the same.
>
> Even so, it definitely could be done, and it'd probably be easier to
> maintain and update than making something from scratch. I mean, they're
> both php, with somewhat similar structures...
>
>
>
I actually don't think it would be. Mediawiki is an awesome tool for many
things but we really shouldn't be using it for things it isn't good
for/meant for. Wordpress is a very good, modular, option for bogs in
particular and is, in my opinion, a perfectly acceptable thing to use for
that. In order to have any good design setup for the blog on mediawiki we
would have to be using a fair bit of rawhtml (something that mediawiki
allows but was never really meant for) and very complicated templates. We
would also need to have a much more understandable comment system then
mediawiki has right now. Liquid threads isn't meant for this type of
conversation, mediawiki itself sucks horribly for a comment type system and
while flow type stuff may be helpful it is down the road and not really in
scope currently from my understanding.

In order to make it flexible enough for those running the blog on the front
end (Staff / Volunteers etc) we  would have to make it relatively easy to
understand that rawhtml/template system at least at some level which is, in
my opinion, too much to ask of them. They should be focused on what they
are writing and other work, not trying to work around the page itself. Our
current visual editor is also unlikely to be workable with
that complicated of a template system in any near future. It would create
an enormous amount of complication for something that doesn't need it.
Dogfooding our product is great but shouldnt' be done "just because" it
should be done where the product makes sense for the task.

James


James Alexander
Manager, Merchandise
Wikimedia Foundation
(415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

Isarra Yos
On 20/03/13 21:09, James Alexander wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:54 PM, Isarra Yos <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On the other hand, how hard could it be to just write an extension to
>> integrate a wordpress database and interface into a mediawiki? Call it a
>> new namespace on the mediawiki end, and... uh... horrible things on the
>> wordpress end...
>>
>> I was going to say that if I had enough spare time I could probably pull
>> that off, but putting this down in text it now occurs to me how utterly
>> insane that is, especially considering how hard a time I had just making my
>> own wordpress and mediawiki installs look the same.
>>
>> Even so, it definitely could be done, and it'd probably be easier to
>> maintain and update than making something from scratch. I mean, they're
>> both php, with somewhat similar structures...
>>
>>
>>
> I actually don't think it would be. Mediawiki is an awesome tool for many
> things but we really shouldn't be using it for things it isn't good
> for/meant for. Wordpress is a very good, modular, option for bogs in
> particular and is, in my opinion, a perfectly acceptable thing to use for
> that. In order to have any good design setup for the blog on mediawiki we
> would have to be using a fair bit of rawhtml (something that mediawiki
> allows but was never really meant for) and very complicated templates. We
> would also need to have a much more understandable comment system then
> mediawiki has right now. Liquid threads isn't meant for this type of
> conversation, mediawiki itself sucks horribly for a comment type system and
> while flow type stuff may be helpful it is down the road and not really in
> scope currently from my understanding.
>
> In order to make it flexible enough for those running the blog on the front
> end (Staff / Volunteers etc) we  would have to make it relatively easy to
> understand that rawhtml/template system at least at some level which is, in
> my opinion, too much to ask of them. They should be focused on what they
> are writing and other work, not trying to work around the page itself. Our
> current visual editor is also unlikely to be workable with
> that complicated of a template system in any near future. It would create
> an enormous amount of complication for something that doesn't need it.
> Dogfooding our product is great but shouldnt' be done "just because" it
> should be done where the product makes sense for the task.
>
> James
>
>
> James Alexander
> Manager, Merchandise
> Wikimedia Foundation
> (415) 839-6885 x6716 @jamesofur
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l

MediaWiki is good for revision control and some forms of categorisation
and has all our users. Wordpress works for blog displaying and
organising pages and tagging stuff and generally throwing it at the
readers. What I am suggesting would take both of those, stuff the -admin
interface and editing and revisions into mediawiki, but have wordpress
handle the content and displaying it to readers (just dealing with the
current revisions on that end)... in a mediawiki skin, even, and then...
well, explode, probably.

I dunno, if it didn't explode I know plenty of folks who would use this,
but it probably wouldn't actually help Wikimedia that much, considering
what they're apparently looking for specifically.

--
-— Isarra


_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikitech-l] open positions at WMF

metasj
On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Isarra Yos <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Dogfooding our product is great but shouldnt' be done "just because" it
>> should be done where the product makes sense for the task.

Supporting more flexible designs - particularly in the realm of
extensions - would be good for Mediawiki in the long term, however.

> MediaWiki is good for revision control and some forms of categorisation and
> has all our users. Wordpress works for blog displaying and organising pages
> and tagging stuff and generally throwing it at the readers. What I am
> suggesting would take both of those, stuff the -admin interface and editing
> and revisions into mediawiki, but have wordpress handle the content and
> displaying it to readers (just dealing with the current revisions on that
> end)... in a mediawiki skin, even, and then... well, explode, probably.
>
> I dunno, if it didn't explode I know plenty of folks who would use this, but
> it probably wouldn't actually help Wikimedia that much, considering what
> they're apparently looking for specifically.

And there are already extensions such as
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WPMW  and
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:WordPress_Comments

_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
[hidden email]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l