Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
76 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
is in active development, and more real-world use-cases will help
focus attention on the higher-priority features that are needed. To
that end, LQT pages at mediawiki.org will start being converted to
Flow in the next couple of weeks.

There are about 1,600 existing LQT pages on Mediawiki, and the three
most active pages are VisualEditor/Feedback, Project:Support_desk, and
Help_talk:CirrusSearch.[1] The Collaboration team has been running
test conversions of those three pages, and fixing issues that have
come up. Those fixes are almost complete, and the team will be ready
to start converting LQT threads to Flow topics soon. (If you’re
interested in the progress, check out phab:T90788[2] and linked
tasks.) The latest set is visible at a labs test server.[3] See an
example topic comparison here: Flow vs LQT.[4])

The VisualEditor/Feedback page will be converted first (per James'
request), around the middle of next week. We’ll pause to assess any
high-priority changes required. After that, we will start converting
more pages. This process may take a couple of weeks to fully run.

The last page to be converted will be Project:Support_desk, as that is
the largest and most active LQT Board.

LQT Threads that are currently on your watchlist, will still be
watchlisted as Flow Topics. New Topics created at Flow Boards on your
watchlist will appear in your Echo notifications, and you can choose
whether or not to watchlist them.

The LQT namespaces will continue to exist. Links to posts/topics will
redirect appropriately, and the LQT history will remain available at
the original location, as well as being mirrored in the Flow history.

There’s a queue of new features in Flow that will be shipped over the
next month or so:

* Table of Contents is done
* Category support for Flow Header and Topics is done
* VE with editing toolbar coming last week of March (phab:T90763) [5]
* Editing other people’s comments coming last week of March (phab:T91086)
* Ability to change the width & side rail in progress, probably out in
April (phab:T88114])
* Search is in progress (no ETA yet) (phab:T76823)
* The ability to choose which Flow notifications end up in Echo,
watchlist, or both, and other more powerful options, will be coming up
next (no ETA yet)

That being said -- there are some LiquidThreads features that don’t
exist in Flow yet.
We’d like to hear which features you use on the current LQT boards,
and that you’re concerned about losing in the Flow conversion. At the
same time, we’d like further suggestions on how we could improve upon
that (or other) features from LQT.

Please give us feedback at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw to keep it
centralized, and test freely at the sandbox.[6]

Much thanks, on behalf of the Collaboration Team,
Quiddity (WMF)

[1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback and
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help_talk:CirrusSearch and
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Support_desk
[2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90788
[3] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Testwiki:Support_desk and
http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback
[4] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Topic:Qmkwqmp0wfcazy9c and
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Project:Support_desk/Error_creating_thumbnail:_Unable_to_save_thumbnail_to_destination
[5] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90763 ,
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91086 ,
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88114 ,
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76823
[6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Sandbox


--
Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
Community Liaison
Wikimedia Foundation

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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Risker
How about just converting those threads back to Wikitext, instead?  That
script already exists, I've seen it used on Mediawiki. Will it mess up the
pages that have already been converted using that script?

Bottom line, it makes no sense to replace software that was considered
barely suitable when it was first developed with "new" software that can't
even do what that old, long-neglected software could do...and in several
cases, there is no intention to ever add the features already available
using Wikitext.

As expectations increase for project users to post their
comments/concerns/ideas/observations on Mediawiki, the use of Flow will
become a barrier for participation.

Risker/Anne


On 16 March 2015 at 20:51, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
> is in active development, and more real-world use-cases will help
> focus attention on the higher-priority features that are needed. To
> that end, LQT pages at mediawiki.org will start being converted to
> Flow in the next couple of weeks.
>
> There are about 1,600 existing LQT pages on Mediawiki, and the three
> most active pages are VisualEditor/Feedback, Project:Support_desk, and
> Help_talk:CirrusSearch.[1] The Collaboration team has been running
> test conversions of those three pages, and fixing issues that have
> come up. Those fixes are almost complete, and the team will be ready
> to start converting LQT threads to Flow topics soon. (If you’re
> interested in the progress, check out phab:T90788[2] and linked
> tasks.) The latest set is visible at a labs test server.[3] See an
> example topic comparison here: Flow vs LQT.[4])
>
> The VisualEditor/Feedback page will be converted first (per James'
> request), around the middle of next week. We’ll pause to assess any
> high-priority changes required. After that, we will start converting
> more pages. This process may take a couple of weeks to fully run.
>
> The last page to be converted will be Project:Support_desk, as that is
> the largest and most active LQT Board.
>
> LQT Threads that are currently on your watchlist, will still be
> watchlisted as Flow Topics. New Topics created at Flow Boards on your
> watchlist will appear in your Echo notifications, and you can choose
> whether or not to watchlist them.
>
> The LQT namespaces will continue to exist. Links to posts/topics will
> redirect appropriately, and the LQT history will remain available at
> the original location, as well as being mirrored in the Flow history.
>
> There’s a queue of new features in Flow that will be shipped over the
> next month or so:
>
> * Table of Contents is done
> * Category support for Flow Header and Topics is done
> * VE with editing toolbar coming last week of March (phab:T90763) [5]
> * Editing other people’s comments coming last week of March (phab:T91086)
> * Ability to change the width & side rail in progress, probably out in
> April (phab:T88114])
> * Search is in progress (no ETA yet) (phab:T76823)
> * The ability to choose which Flow notifications end up in Echo,
> watchlist, or both, and other more powerful options, will be coming up
> next (no ETA yet)
>
> That being said -- there are some LiquidThreads features that don’t
> exist in Flow yet.
> We’d like to hear which features you use on the current LQT boards,
> and that you’re concerned about losing in the Flow conversion. At the
> same time, we’d like further suggestions on how we could improve upon
> that (or other) features from LQT.
>
> Please give us feedback at
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw to keep it
> centralized, and test freely at the sandbox.[6]
>
> Much thanks, on behalf of the Collaboration Team,
> Quiddity (WMF)
>
> [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help_talk:CirrusSearch and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Support_desk
> [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90788
> [3] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Testwiki:Support_desk and
> http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback
> [4] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Topic:Qmkwqmp0wfcazy9c and
>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Project:Support_desk/Error_creating_thumbnail:_Unable_to_save_thumbnail_to_destination
> [5] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90763 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91086 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88114 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76823
> [6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Sandbox
>
>
> --
> Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
> Community Liaison
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Jon Robson
In reply to this post by Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
Finnnnallllyy!
So happy to hear this is happening :)
 On 16 Mar 2015 17:52, "Nick Wilson (Quiddity)" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
> is in active development, and more real-world use-cases will help
> focus attention on the higher-priority features that are needed. To
> that end, LQT pages at mediawiki.org will start being converted to
> Flow in the next couple of weeks.
>
> There are about 1,600 existing LQT pages on Mediawiki, and the three
> most active pages are VisualEditor/Feedback, Project:Support_desk, and
> Help_talk:CirrusSearch.[1] The Collaboration team has been running
> test conversions of those three pages, and fixing issues that have
> come up. Those fixes are almost complete, and the team will be ready
> to start converting LQT threads to Flow topics soon. (If you’re
> interested in the progress, check out phab:T90788[2] and linked
> tasks.) The latest set is visible at a labs test server.[3] See an
> example topic comparison here: Flow vs LQT.[4])
>
> The VisualEditor/Feedback page will be converted first (per James'
> request), around the middle of next week. We’ll pause to assess any
> high-priority changes required. After that, we will start converting
> more pages. This process may take a couple of weeks to fully run.
>
> The last page to be converted will be Project:Support_desk, as that is
> the largest and most active LQT Board.
>
> LQT Threads that are currently on your watchlist, will still be
> watchlisted as Flow Topics. New Topics created at Flow Boards on your
> watchlist will appear in your Echo notifications, and you can choose
> whether or not to watchlist them.
>
> The LQT namespaces will continue to exist. Links to posts/topics will
> redirect appropriately, and the LQT history will remain available at
> the original location, as well as being mirrored in the Flow history.
>
> There’s a queue of new features in Flow that will be shipped over the
> next month or so:
>
> * Table of Contents is done
> * Category support for Flow Header and Topics is done
> * VE with editing toolbar coming last week of March (phab:T90763) [5]
> * Editing other people’s comments coming last week of March (phab:T91086)
> * Ability to change the width & side rail in progress, probably out in
> April (phab:T88114])
> * Search is in progress (no ETA yet) (phab:T76823)
> * The ability to choose which Flow notifications end up in Echo,
> watchlist, or both, and other more powerful options, will be coming up
> next (no ETA yet)
>
> That being said -- there are some LiquidThreads features that don’t
> exist in Flow yet.
> We’d like to hear which features you use on the current LQT boards,
> and that you’re concerned about losing in the Flow conversion. At the
> same time, we’d like further suggestions on how we could improve upon
> that (or other) features from LQT.
>
> Please give us feedback at
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw to keep it
> centralized, and test freely at the sandbox.[6]
>
> Much thanks, on behalf of the Collaboration Team,
> Quiddity (WMF)
>
> [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help_talk:CirrusSearch and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Support_desk
> [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90788
> [3] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Testwiki:Support_desk and
> http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback
> [4] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Topic:Qmkwqmp0wfcazy9c and
>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Project:Support_desk/Error_creating_thumbnail:_Unable_to_save_thumbnail_to_destination
> [5] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90763 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91086 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88114 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76823
> [6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Sandbox
>
>
> --
> Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
> Community Liaison
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Ryan Lane-2
In reply to this post by Risker
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Risker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> How about just converting those threads back to Wikitext, instead?  That
> script already exists, I've seen it used on Mediawiki. Will it mess up the
> pages that have already been converted using that script?
>
> Bottom line, it makes no sense to replace software that was considered
> barely suitable when it was first developed with "new" software that can't
> even do what that old, long-neglected software could do...and in several
> cases, there is no intention to ever add the features already available
> using Wikitext.
>
> As expectations increase for project users to post their
> comments/concerns/ideas/observations on Mediawiki, the use of Flow will
> become a barrier for participation.
>
>
As someone who used LQT a lot, I'd say I'd much rather flow replace the
pages I maintained using LQT. Maybe you dislike flow, but it's *way* more
useful than wikitext for discussion. I never want to go back to the days
where I needed to discuss things with wikitext ever again. Wikitext
discussion pages are just the absolute worst.

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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Risker
On 16 March 2015 at 21:20, Ryan Lane <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Risker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > How about just converting those threads back to Wikitext, instead?  That
> > script already exists, I've seen it used on Mediawiki. Will it mess up
> the
> > pages that have already been converted using that script?
> >
> > Bottom line, it makes no sense to replace software that was considered
> > barely suitable when it was first developed with "new" software that
> can't
> > even do what that old, long-neglected software could do...and in several
> > cases, there is no intention to ever add the features already available
> > using Wikitext.
> >
> > As expectations increase for project users to post their
> > comments/concerns/ideas/observations on Mediawiki, the use of Flow will
> > become a barrier for participation.
> >
> >
> As someone who used LQT a lot, I'd say I'd much rather flow replace the
> pages I maintained using LQT. Maybe you dislike flow, but it's *way* more
> useful than wikitext for discussion. I never want to go back to the days
> where I needed to discuss things with wikitext ever again. Wikitext
> discussion pages are just the absolute worst.
>
>

I hear what you are saying, Ryan.  I'm also reflecting on the fact that as
there is increasing pressure on "ordinary" editors to post their
discussions about Mediawiki on the Mediawikiwiki, they would then
encountering *another* new interface that doesn't operate in anything
similar to what they've experienced before, and that we know isn't up to
handling stuff that even LQT handled without blinking.  On the other hand,
based on what I'm hearing about the "success" of  installing Flow on
Office-wiki, the end result may very well be fewer people coming to
complain about something else, which might be viewed as a net positive.

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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
In reply to this post by Risker
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Risker <[hidden email]> wrote:

> How about just converting those threads back to Wikitext, instead?  That
> script already exists, I've seen it used on Mediawiki. Will it mess up the
> pages that have already been converted using that script?
>
> Bottom line, it makes no sense to replace software that was considered
> barely suitable when it was first developed with "new" software that can't
> even do what that old, long-neglected software could do...and in several
> cases, there is no intention to ever add the features already available
> using Wikitext.
>
> As expectations increase for project users to post their
> comments/concerns/ideas/observations on Mediawiki, the use of Flow will
> become a barrier for participation.
>
> Risker/Anne
>

Converting LQT to Wikitext would lose the major benefits of:
* per-Topic watchlisting,
* per-Topic category support,
* Sortable views (with Filterable views on the roadmap [1]),
as well as the immensely easier process for new-editors to be able to
participate in discussions, and be notified about replies.[2]

[1] See Pau's design notes at
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1DQabV3mjE9ReV9zs1qAi8u_A5560QEVX4aK95pc0Whs/edit#slide=id.p
and Hhhippo's ideas/notes at
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Hhhippo/Flow/TOC_and_filters
[2] The feedback from the ongoing trial at the Frwiki newcomers'
helpdesk, is that the Flow version has better engagement, with more
editors returning to give further information, or ask a followup
question, or just to say thanks.
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Forum_des_nouveaux/Flow
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Forum_des_nouveaux

Flow has been improving over the months. I hope you'll give it a try
at the sandbox, check out the list of upcoming features (in 1st
message), and let the
team know what feature(s) you're most concerned about. The more
specific the feedback, the more it will help influence the order new
features are developed in.

Thanks, as always :)
Quiddity (WMF)

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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Kevin Wayne Williams
In reply to this post by Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
Nick Wilson (Quiddity) schreef op 2015/03/16 om 17:51:
> LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
> is in active development, and more real-world use-cases will help
> focus attention on the higher-priority features that are needed. To
> that end, LQT pages at mediawiki.org will start being converted to
> Flow in the next couple of weeks.

I assume that the intention is to greater increase the divide between
Wikipedia editors and the Wikimedia Foundation? It would be nice if the
WMF would focus on becoming good with the tools that editors use instead
of attempting to convince them that inadequate substitutes are adequate.

KWW


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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Kevin Wayne Williams
In reply to this post by Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
Nick Wilson (Quiddity) schreef op 2015/03/16 om 19:03:

> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Risker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> How about just converting those threads back to Wikitext, instead?  That
>> script already exists, I've seen it used on Mediawiki. Will it mess up the
>> pages that have already been converted using that script?
>>
>> Bottom line, it makes no sense to replace software that was considered
>> barely suitable when it was first developed with "new" software that can't
>> even do what that old, long-neglected software could do...and in several
>> cases, there is no intention to ever add the features already available
>> using Wikitext.
>>
>> As expectations increase for project users to post their
>> comments/concerns/ideas/observations on Mediawiki, the use of Flow will
>> become a barrier for participation.
>>
>> Risker/Anne
>>
>
> Converting LQT to Wikitext would lose the major benefits of:
> * per-Topic watchlisting,
> * per-Topic category support,
> * Sortable views (with Filterable views on the roadmap [1]),
> as well as the immensely easier process for new-editors to be able to
> participate in discussions, and be notified about replies.[2]
>

But it would provide the advantage of using the standardized discussion
technique used in virtually all Wikimedia installations. There doesn't
seem to be any particular user demand to adopt Flow, so there's no
reason to believe it will gain any more traction than LQT ever did.

KWW


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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Pine W
Pardon me if I missed an announcement, but will there be any office hours
about Flow in the near future? I have a few general questions about
cross-wiki discussions and the relationship of Flow to VE. (I'm mostly
focused on VE right now.)

Thanks,
Pine
On Mar 16, 2015 11:21 PM, "Kevin Wayne Williams" <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Nick Wilson (Quiddity) schreef op 2015/03/16 om 19:03:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 6:02 PM, Risker <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> How about just converting those threads back to Wikitext, instead?  That
>>> script already exists, I've seen it used on Mediawiki. Will it mess up
>>> the
>>> pages that have already been converted using that script?
>>>
>>> Bottom line, it makes no sense to replace software that was considered
>>> barely suitable when it was first developed with "new" software that
>>> can't
>>> even do what that old, long-neglected software could do...and in several
>>> cases, there is no intention to ever add the features already available
>>> using Wikitext.
>>>
>>> As expectations increase for project users to post their
>>> comments/concerns/ideas/observations on Mediawiki, the use of Flow will
>>> become a barrier for participation.
>>>
>>> Risker/Anne
>>>
>>>
>> Converting LQT to Wikitext would lose the major benefits of:
>> * per-Topic watchlisting,
>> * per-Topic category support,
>> * Sortable views (with Filterable views on the roadmap [1]),
>> as well as the immensely easier process for new-editors to be able to
>> participate in discussions, and be notified about replies.[2]
>>
>>
> But it would provide the advantage of using the standardized discussion
> technique used in virtually all Wikimedia installations. There doesn't seem
> to be any particular user demand to adopt Flow, so there's no reason to
> believe it will gain any more traction than LQT ever did.
>
> KWW
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Erik Moeller-4
In reply to this post by Kevin Wayne Williams
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 11:21 PM, Kevin Wayne Williams
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> There doesn't seem to be any particular user demand to adopt Flow,
> so there's no reason to believe it will gain any more traction than LQT ever did.

There was significant community interest and momentum behind LQT
including various votes to enable it [1], and there is significant
interest in Flow now [2]. The main thing that prevented LQT from wider
adoption was not lack of community interest, it was our decision to
put the project on hold due to both major architectural concerns and
resource constraints at the time. We've committed to providing an
upgrade path, and this is our follow-through to that commitment.

Our main objective in Flow development is to solve for progressively
more challenging collaboration/conversation use cases well, and to
demonstrate positive impact at increasing scale, with the goal of
providing a better experience for new and experienced editors alike.
We recognize that we still have a long way to go, but we can already
demonstrate that the system does one thing well, which is to make the
process of using talk pages much more understandable for new users:

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Flow/Moderated_Testing,_November,_2014:_talk_pages_and_Flow

We're also seeing, as Nick pointed out, that users in a mentorship use
case are more likely to follow-up with their mentors. This is a pretty
big deal -- quantitative research shows that this type of mentorship
improves engagement and retention of new users. [3]

So mentorship is an obvious early stage use case, even if the rest of
a community functions through traditional talk pages. "Village pump"
type pages that are fairly distinct from article talk pages are
another obvious use case where a more forum-like system can relatively
quickly outperform the talk page based approach that is rife with edit
conflicts and other annoyances. We are trialing the first such use
case in Catalan with lots of community participation.

As for inconsistency and fragmentation of mediawiki.org, if anything,
the conversion of LQT pages on mediawiki.org will create greater
consistency as we're already using Flow on Beta Features talk pages (
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Content_translation is a nice
example of a feedback page with lots of continuous and substantive
comments from experienced users).

Flow may not serve major use cases on English Wikipedia today, or
tomorrow; that's okay. Smaller projects are often happy to adopt
technologies that may not meet the expectations of a large, mature
community like en.wp yet, because they may be more concerned with the
experience of new users than with the risks or inconveniences
associated with features in earlier stages of development. (I am not
dismissing either risks or inconveniences in saying so, as the
requirements do of course differ at different scale.)

We, in turn, remain committed to building tools that serve users well,
continuously improving, and continuously demonstrating value through
data and qualitative validation. [4] This is but a small step, but
it's an important one.

Erik

[1] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/search/query/radjv9rJZNLU/#R
[2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Flow/Rollout
[3] http://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.1496v1.pdf
[4] What we learn is summarized in our quarterly reviews, most
recently: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/Collaboration_Q3_2014-15_WMF_Quarterly_Review.pdf

--
Erik Möller
VP of Product & Strategy, Wikimedia Foundation

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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Gerard Meijssen-3
In reply to this post by Kevin Wayne Williams
Hoi,
Sorry but Wikitext is of such a nature that I do not use it as much as
possible. LiquidThreads was a huge step forward and I still find it
astonishing that it was left to rot for such a long time.I really welcome
the move towards Flow.

Flow is not an  inadequate substitute, it is what will replace wikitext
hopefully soon for discussions. I cannot wait.
Thanks,
      GerardM

On 17 March 2015 at 06:43, Kevin Wayne Williams <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Nick Wilson (Quiddity) schreef op 2015/03/16 om 17:51:
>
>> LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
>> is in active development, and more real-world use-cases will help
>> focus attention on the higher-priority features that are needed. To
>> that end, LQT pages at mediawiki.org will start being converted to
>> Flow in the next couple of weeks.
>>
>
> I assume that the intention is to greater increase the divide between
> Wikipedia editors and the Wikimedia Foundation? It would be nice if the WMF
> would focus on becoming good with the tools that editors use instead of
> attempting to convince them that inadequate substitutes are adequate.
>
> KWW
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Ricordisamoa
In reply to this post by Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
Hi Nick,
I'm glad the Foundation is finally valuing a usable discussion system.

Unfortunately, there are some serious issues with Flow which will
prevent my use of it in production if not addressed in full:

  * Administrators *must* be able to to see a deleted Flow board without
    undeleting it (T90972 <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90972>)
  * Ordinary users *must* be able to move topics between boards (T88140
    <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88140>)
  * Ordinary users *must* be able to edit AND move AND indent AND dedent
    other users' comments (T78253
    <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T78253>)
  * An arbitrary indentation level *must* be allowed, with optional
    facilitations for adding an {{outdent}}-like marker
  * Every basic functionality (including but not limited to the
    "preview" button) *must* work without relying on JavaScript (T60019
    <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T60019>)

I see that the implementation of many features was delayed at the
initial stage of development, but they can't be ignored when trying to
deploy such a software in production. Thank you.

Il 17/03/2015 01:51, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) ha scritto:

> LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
> is in active development, and more real-world use-cases will help
> focus attention on the higher-priority features that are needed. To
> that end, LQT pages at mediawiki.org will start being converted to
> Flow in the next couple of weeks.
>
> There are about 1,600 existing LQT pages on Mediawiki, and the three
> most active pages are VisualEditor/Feedback, Project:Support_desk, and
> Help_talk:CirrusSearch.[1] The Collaboration team has been running
> test conversions of those three pages, and fixing issues that have
> come up. Those fixes are almost complete, and the team will be ready
> to start converting LQT threads to Flow topics soon. (If you’re
> interested in the progress, check out phab:T90788[2] and linked
> tasks.) The latest set is visible at a labs test server.[3] See an
> example topic comparison here: Flow vs LQT.[4])
>
> The VisualEditor/Feedback page will be converted first (per James'
> request), around the middle of next week. We’ll pause to assess any
> high-priority changes required. After that, we will start converting
> more pages. This process may take a couple of weeks to fully run.
>
> The last page to be converted will be Project:Support_desk, as that is
> the largest and most active LQT Board.
>
> LQT Threads that are currently on your watchlist, will still be
> watchlisted as Flow Topics. New Topics created at Flow Boards on your
> watchlist will appear in your Echo notifications, and you can choose
> whether or not to watchlist them.
>
> The LQT namespaces will continue to exist. Links to posts/topics will
> redirect appropriately, and the LQT history will remain available at
> the original location, as well as being mirrored in the Flow history.
>
> There’s a queue of new features in Flow that will be shipped over the
> next month or so:
>
> * Table of Contents is done
> * Category support for Flow Header and Topics is done
> * VE with editing toolbar coming last week of March (phab:T90763) [5]
> * Editing other people’s comments coming last week of March (phab:T91086)
> * Ability to change the width & side rail in progress, probably out in
> April (phab:T88114])
> * Search is in progress (no ETA yet) (phab:T76823)
> * The ability to choose which Flow notifications end up in Echo,
> watchlist, or both, and other more powerful options, will be coming up
> next (no ETA yet)
>
> That being said -- there are some LiquidThreads features that don’t
> exist in Flow yet.
> We’d like to hear which features you use on the current LQT boards,
> and that you’re concerned about losing in the Flow conversion. At the
> same time, we’d like further suggestions on how we could improve upon
> that (or other) features from LQT.
>
> Please give us feedback at
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw to keep it
> centralized, and test freely at the sandbox.[6]
>
> Much thanks, on behalf of the Collaboration Team,
> Quiddity (WMF)
>
> [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help_talk:CirrusSearch and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Support_desk
> [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90788
> [3] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Testwiki:Support_desk and
> http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback
> [4] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Topic:Qmkwqmp0wfcazy9c and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Project:Support_desk/Error_creating_thumbnail:_Unable_to_save_thumbnail_to_destination
> [5] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90763 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91086 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88114 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76823
> [6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Sandbox
>
>

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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Max Semenik
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Ricordisamoa <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>  * An arbitrary indentation level *must* be allowed, with optional
>    facilitations for adding an {{outdent}}-like marker
>

Why? Manual indentation just leads to you having to decode these levels
sometimes. Soulless machines are better at indenting consistently than us
meatbags. Also, my personal opinion is that indenting is just silly and
needs to die, not accumulate more cruft.


>  * Every basic functionality (including but not limited to the
>    "preview" button) *must* work without relying on JavaScript (T60019
>    <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T60019>)


Surprise! It's 2015, and web doesn't quite work without JS. Some basics
still need to work without it, but very basics.

--
Best regards,
Max Semenik ([[User:MaxSem]])
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

pi zero
In reply to this post by Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
For my perspective (sorry if this is covered somewhere I've missed), who
made the decision to do this conversion?  One of my reasons for interest is
that at en.wn we have LQT and *do not want* Flow.  (A fairly good summary
of the sense of the en.wn community is (1) we would rather LQT than Flow
for our comments pages, (2) our comments pages, which are meant to hold up
well when edited by people who are utterly clueless about wiki markup, are
better off with LQT than as ordinary wiki pages, and (3) we mostly detest
LQT and want straight wiki markup for all pages that are part of our
project's primary function.)

On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> LiquidThreads (LQT) has not been well-supported in a long time. Flow
> is in active development, and more real-world use-cases will help
> focus attention on the higher-priority features that are needed. To
> that end, LQT pages at mediawiki.org will start being converted to
> Flow in the next couple of weeks.
>
> There are about 1,600 existing LQT pages on Mediawiki, and the three
> most active pages are VisualEditor/Feedback, Project:Support_desk, and
> Help_talk:CirrusSearch.[1] The Collaboration team has been running
> test conversions of those three pages, and fixing issues that have
> come up. Those fixes are almost complete, and the team will be ready
> to start converting LQT threads to Flow topics soon. (If you’re
> interested in the progress, check out phab:T90788[2] and linked
> tasks.) The latest set is visible at a labs test server.[3] See an
> example topic comparison here: Flow vs LQT.[4])
>
> The VisualEditor/Feedback page will be converted first (per James'
> request), around the middle of next week. We’ll pause to assess any
> high-priority changes required. After that, we will start converting
> more pages. This process may take a couple of weeks to fully run.
>
> The last page to be converted will be Project:Support_desk, as that is
> the largest and most active LQT Board.
>
> LQT Threads that are currently on your watchlist, will still be
> watchlisted as Flow Topics. New Topics created at Flow Boards on your
> watchlist will appear in your Echo notifications, and you can choose
> whether or not to watchlist them.
>
> The LQT namespaces will continue to exist. Links to posts/topics will
> redirect appropriately, and the LQT history will remain available at
> the original location, as well as being mirrored in the Flow history.
>
> There’s a queue of new features in Flow that will be shipped over the
> next month or so:
>
> * Table of Contents is done
> * Category support for Flow Header and Topics is done
> * VE with editing toolbar coming last week of March (phab:T90763) [5]
> * Editing other people’s comments coming last week of March (phab:T91086)
> * Ability to change the width & side rail in progress, probably out in
> April (phab:T88114])
> * Search is in progress (no ETA yet) (phab:T76823)
> * The ability to choose which Flow notifications end up in Echo,
> watchlist, or both, and other more powerful options, will be coming up
> next (no ETA yet)
>
> That being said -- there are some LiquidThreads features that don’t
> exist in Flow yet.
> We’d like to hear which features you use on the current LQT boards,
> and that you’re concerned about losing in the Flow conversion. At the
> same time, we’d like further suggestions on how we could improve upon
> that (or other) features from LQT.
>
> Please give us feedback at
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw to keep it
> centralized, and test freely at the sandbox.[6]
>
> Much thanks, on behalf of the Collaboration Team,
> Quiddity (WMF)
>
> [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help_talk:CirrusSearch and
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Support_desk
> [2] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90788
> [3] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Testwiki:Support_desk and
> http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Feedback
> [4] http://flow-tests.wmflabs.org/wiki/Topic:Qmkwqmp0wfcazy9c and
>
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Project:Support_desk/Error_creating_thumbnail:_Unable_to_save_thumbnail_to_destination
> [5] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T90763 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91086 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T88114 ,
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76823
> [6] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Sandbox
>
>
> --
> Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
> Community Liaison
> Wikimedia Foundation
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
In reply to this post by Max Semenik
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Max Semenik <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Ricordisamoa <
> [hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> >  * An arbitrary indentation level *must* be allowed, with optional
> >    facilitations for adding an {{outdent}}-like marker
> >
>
> Why? Manual indentation just leads to you having to decode these levels
> sometimes. Soulless machines are better at indenting consistently than us
> meatbags. Also, my personal opinion is that indenting is just silly and
> needs to die, not accumulate more cruft.
>

I suspect this is referring to the misfeature where (in the current
configuration) it just stops indenting entirely after two levels, making it
impossible to follow the reply structure if it's not trivially simple.


> >  * Every basic functionality (including but not limited to the
> >    "preview" button) *must* work without relying on JavaScript (T60019
> >    <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T60019>)
>
>
> Surprise! It's 2015, and web doesn't quite work without JS. Some basics
> still need to work without it, but very basics.
>

Just because too many websites allow themselves to be broken without
JavaScript doesn't mean we should too. If you want you could try to debate
that "preview" isn't basic functionality, but a dismissal like this is
simply uncalled for.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Ricordisamoa
In reply to this post by Max Semenik
Il 17/03/2015 14:05, Max Semenik ha scritto:

> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Ricordisamoa <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>>   * An arbitrary indentation level *must* be allowed, with optional
>>     facilitations for adding an {{outdent}}-like marker
>>
> Why? Manual indentation just leads to you having to decode these levels
> sometimes. Soulless machines are better at indenting consistently than us
> meatbags. Also, my personal opinion is that indenting is just silly and
> needs to die, not accumulate more cruft.

Software cannot understand which post a message replies to.
In case a sensible way of reducing clutter in the interface without
limiting indenting options can be found, I'll favor it.

>
>
>>   * Every basic functionality (including but not limited to the
>>     "preview" button) *must* work without relying on JavaScript (T60019
>>     <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T60019>)
>
> Surprise! It's 2015, and web doesn't quite work without JS. Some basics
> still need to work without it, but very basics.
>

I have always been proud of contributing to projects that value
accessibility more than fancy animations.
Flow is a regression in regard to this.

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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Ricordisamoa
In reply to this post by Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
Il 17/03/2015 14:34, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) ha scritto:

> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:05 AM, Max Semenik <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Ricordisamoa <
>> [hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>   * An arbitrary indentation level *must* be allowed, with optional
>>>     facilitations for adding an {{outdent}}-like marker
>>>
>> Why? Manual indentation just leads to you having to decode these levels
>> sometimes. Soulless machines are better at indenting consistently than us
>> meatbags. Also, my personal opinion is that indenting is just silly and
>> needs to die, not accumulate more cruft.
>>
> I suspect this is referring to the misfeature where (in the current
> configuration) it just stops indenting entirely after two levels, making it
> impossible to follow the reply structure if it's not trivially simple.

Exactly.

>
>
>>>   * Every basic functionality (including but not limited to the
>>>     "preview" button) *must* work without relying on JavaScript (T60019
>>>     <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T60019>)
>>
>> Surprise! It's 2015, and web doesn't quite work without JS. Some basics
>> still need to work without it, but very basics.
>>
> Just because too many websites allow themselves to be broken without
> JavaScript doesn't mean we should too. If you want you could try to debate
> that "preview" isn't basic functionality, but a dismissal like this is
> simply uncalled for.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l


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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
In reply to this post by Nick Wilson (Quiddity)
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> We’d like to hear which features you use on the current LQT boards,
> and that you’re concerned about losing in the Flow conversion.


Working watchlist functionality, see
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76862 and
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T68876. Yes, LQT's inventing of their own
pseudo-watchlist rather sucks, but at least it functions correctly.

Please give us feedback at
> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw to keep it
> centralized, and test freely at the sandbox.[6]
>

No thanks, I prefer this mailing list thread. Feel free to copy this there
if you want, but please reply here too
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Petr Bena
Ok, here I copy my message

Petrb (talkcontribsblock)

Hi,

I think you all missed some old good rants. So here is one :) why the
hell is the URL Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw and not something easy to read
and remember?


On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 2:42 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Nick Wilson (Quiddity) <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> We’d like to hear which features you use on the current LQT boards,
>> and that you’re concerned about losing in the Flow conversion.
>
>
> Working watchlist functionality, see
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76862 and
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T68876. Yes, LQT's inventing of their own
> pseudo-watchlist rather sucks, but at least it functions correctly.
>
> Please give us feedback at
>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sdoatsbslsafx6lw to keep it
>> centralized, and test freely at the sandbox.[6]
>>
>
> No thanks, I prefer this mailing list thread. Feel free to copy this there
> if you want, but please reply here too
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

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

Re: Starting conversion of LiquidThreads to Flow at mediawiki.org

Brad Jorsch (Anomie)
In reply to this post by Ricordisamoa
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 9:37 AM, Ricordisamoa <[hidden email]>
wrote:

Software cannot understand which post a message replies to.
>

It can, and more easily than with raw wikitext, as long as the correct
"reply" button is used, i.e. if people actually click reply instead of
using the already-there box for creating a new "top-level" post in the
topic.
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
1234