[08:35:58] legoktm: just one more thought: can https://grafana.wikimedia.org/dashboard/db/job-queue-health be related some way to non-delivered user notifications about changes in their watchlists? [08:38:21] eg. a user has milion pages in his watchlist, all are edited some day; will he receive milion cotifications immediately? delayed? [13:55:19] I'll answer on his talk page [15:37:44] Anyone know what it would take to move an entire namespace of content from one wiki to another? [15:38:06] E.g. I'm considering moving all of Research and Research_talk from Meta to MediaWiki.org [15:38:34] Is there a cross-wiki import mechanism that would make this not crazy-talk? [15:38:45] (Assuming consensus all around) [15:41:38] there's the usual import tool, might need to be setup specially to do a Meta to MW transfer, but it should be do-able. [15:42:10] that'll preserve the page history and authorship information on each page, then the redundant pages on Meta can be deleted. [15:42:45] I wonder if we could replace those pages with a cross-wiki (soft) redirect. [15:42:58] halfak: maybe like this, step a) get list of all page names in the namespace, via https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Allpages [15:43:09] then step b) paste list of page names into Special:Export form [15:43:09] I suppose that would be easy because the titles are deterministic. [15:43:54] mutante, gotcha. That makes sense. Will it use central auth to match users cross-wiki [15:44:07] no [15:44:20] I'm not convinced all of that namespace would be in scope on mediawiki.org [15:46:07] it won't use CentralAuth, but the usernames should, following SUL finalisation, be the same on both Meta and MediaWiki [15:47:59] halfak, how much of it meets https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:About#What_MediaWiki.org_is ? [15:48:29] NotASpy, gotcha. Great. That makes sense. [15:48:40] Krenair, we document a lot of research on meta already [15:49:06] Krenair, I don't see how any research content is relevant there [15:49:33] so this was really just an example? [15:49:36] ok [15:50:00] No, I'm seriously considering moving all Research content to mediawiki.org [15:50:14] so it wasn't hypothetical [15:50:33] Well, in a way it is because I don't have consensus to do so yet [15:50:43] But I think it'll be trivial to get that from people who author content there. [15:50:54] you'll need it from mediawiki.org users [15:51:01] Oh sure. [15:51:12] not so trivial if it doesn't meet our existing scope [15:51:19] I don't forsee a problem given how much research content is already on mediawiki.org [15:51:26] Krenair, that's obviously not true [15:51:34] Most research content is about MediaWiki components [15:51:40] Or studies of MediaWiki installations [15:51:48] okay [15:52:21] well no, you won't need permission from the authors on Meta, they've already given the necessary permission when they submitted their content, the only issues will be whether it's OK to import that content on MediaWiki, and whether Meta then wants to redirect those pages to MediaWiki or whether it'll keep those pages running in parallel [15:54:09] NotASpy, still going to want consensus from both [15:54:40] Essentially, it seems that MediaWiki.org is more welcoming to things we'd want to do than Meta is -- though arguably, Meta is still the Right(TM) place for the content. [15:55:06] what sort of things would you want to do that meta would be unhappy about? [15:55:23] Use Flow and VE. The researchers who write this content want both. [15:55:45] heh, yeah [15:56:08] (Personally, I never use VE and I operate just fine in talk pages, but I'm representing my community/collaborators in pushing these issues.) [15:56:34] though isn't VE enabled in the meta research ns? [15:56:57] Oh maybe that one did go through. [15:56:58] * halfak checks [15:57:37] Indeed it is! Cool. [15:57:47] Flow is the biggest issue I'm struggling with though. [15:58:03] I want researchers who don't edit Wikipedia to feel comfortable discussing on-wiki. [15:58:13] They like Flow *a lot* [15:58:23] Talk Pages are a big barrier. [15:58:40] Getting them to participate in RFCs is hard because they are a *mess* of wikitext. [15:59:13] Anyway, that's another discussion. I just needed to know if transferring content was technically possible or not. [15:59:25] So thanks for the help mutante & NotASpy [16:00:17] yeah [16:00:20] it is [16:00:29] and we already have meta setup as a source for mww imports [16:00:44] great. [16:02:05] can't Meta allow Flow in a dedicated namespace or something, to help ? [16:02:48] Yeah. We tried that. [16:02:59] meta could probably get flow enabled in any talk namespace they wanted [16:03:43] Meta-pedians (at least the admins who aren't me) have uniformly decided that Flow will not be allowed no matter its status. [16:04:15] I have an old RFC about just enabling Flow in the research namespace. The top contributors to that namespace all came forward in support. [16:04:40] rest of the community wasn't thrilled? [16:04:42] Regretfully, many of us are staff and therefor are suspected of trying to somehow undermine Meta. [16:04:53] Krenair, I think most of the community doesn't care [16:05:08] But the admins who show up to these discussions are ideologically opposed to FLow. [16:05:25] User studies and empiricism be damned! [18:59:56] Question: Where would I go about adding something if I wanted to add a link like [[Special:CentralAuth/{{BASEPAGENAME}}|CentralAuth]] to the Toolbox portion of the sidebar when looking at a page in userspace? I can't seem to find the appropriate interface page to request it on. [19:04:26] I don't think that part is customisable by interface messages [19:05:03] might be able to mw.util.addPortletLink [19:05:14] (in js) [23:38:26] which glue puts these separate files together and makes them callable from within eachother? https://github.com/azatoth/twinkle/blob/master/sync.pl#L41 i'm writing a userscript, need to include one file from within another, have no idea how :-/ [23:41:29] they're probably parts of a single gadget [23:43:00] hi MatmaRex :) they're named differently, which technology is used to indicate that they're a part of a single gadget? [23:43:23] the gadget definition [23:43:26] on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Gadgets-definition [23:43:40] i'm afraid that won't work for a user script that isn't a gadget :( [23:44:02] you're right, how do i do it in user script? [23:44:33] particularly i would like to not have a single script in a huge file. and one of my variables needs to be a long list, it would clutter the code, so i'd rather keep it in a separate file [23:44:45] can you just merge them and put them in a single page? that's probably the easiest [23:44:46] hm [23:44:59] can't you do mw.loader.load()? [23:45:00] does transcluding scripts work? o_O [23:45:14] i'll take a look at the mw.loader.load, one sec [23:45:19] you can call importScript(…) from one script to load the other, i guess [23:45:30] or mw.loader.load, different syntax, same thing [23:45:36] Some sort of loader script/single entry point [23:51:18] mw.loader.load works, thanks; a bit ugly because i have to use a raw /w/ url, but i'll just move that to a subroutine and forget about it