[01:27:44] !g 143f34950fe456257c4ed3ca43e45314e225d5b6 [02:12:43] TimStarling: any idea why SpecialCite is only enabled in a very few cases? [02:13:14] what does that do? [02:13:21] it's probably always been that way [02:13:31] 'Adds a [[Special:Cite|citation]] special page and toolbox link' [02:13:43] 2005-11-27 Special:Cite for Wikipedia -Ævar [02:13:58] Just seemed a slightly arbitary set of enabled cases [02:14:52] It would seem it's potentially useful everywhere [02:16:36] he was probably just testing it but never got around to enabling it fully [02:17:04] I'll enable it then [02:17:09] I'm sure we'll be told if it's broken [02:18:36] I don't know, wikipedians can be a bit sensitive about things appearing in their sidebars [02:19:02] I would be inclined to post to wikitech-l first, at least that way you can say that they were warned [03:45:44] Reedy: have you looked at https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/7702/ ? [03:46:02] wmf config : change some hardcoded IP to a PHP variable [12:30:27] ohaio [12:30:38] how do I fix Planet Wikimedia? [12:42:42] odder: which one? stuck? [12:44:52] mutante: http://pl.planet.wikimedia.org - the admin is inactive, and the aggregator does not work since March 3 [12:49:41] odder: some feed URLs are broken, and for others parsing fails. would you want a list of broken feed URLs to fix them on wiki? [12:53:24] mutante: I already wrote to the adminasking if he still wants to be responsible for the planet, maybe I'll take the job over from him [12:53:39] odder: updated, reload planet page [12:53:41] bit a list of broken URLs would be useful anyway [12:54:36] oh, that's lovely, thanks mutante! [12:56:06] odder: np. http://wikitech.wikimedia.org/view/Planet/pl [12:57:09] thanks again [13:00:37] odder: actually it should be on http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Planet_Wikimedia#Requests_for_Update_or_Removal [13:03:19] huh I got added to planet [13:03:32] cool, I need to blog something this weekend then [13:03:37] heh:) [13:03:53] well I have something to blog so that's all godo [13:03:54] *good [13:07:48] * YuviPanda should add himself to the planet [13:55:39] sumanah, I'm working on documentation as part of my 20% time today. do you have any specific areas that need care? [13:56:25] MaxSem: the basic MediaWiki installation docs - someday, as part of a large concerted effort, we need to reorg them. But for now, I would greatly appreciate merely removing inaccuracies and obsoletions [13:56:32] would it be expensive to create a special page that lists pages without templates on them? [13:56:38] okay [13:56:42] MaxSem: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=27650 [13:56:49] more spesificaly files [13:57:04] as files without a template means they are without license and hence a copyright problem [13:57:21] ToAruShiroiNeko, mmm [13:58:03] this sould be outragious for en.wikipedia probably but for smaller wikis it would help [13:58:41] something like first 1000 or 5000 files would be sufficient for smaller wikis [13:59:06] since they have fewer than 5000 files total [14:03:06] or a check if file description exeeds 4 characters which is the minimum needed [14:03:14] heh, it took 11 seconds to retrieve 20 of them on enwiki [14:03:19] as a template can only be transcluded with 5 charatcers or more [14:03:49] MaxSem oh? I thoought en.wiki had bots hunting for those [14:04:00] so I'd say it's not an option on any site of a size that could make sense [14:04:09] I busted sd wiki today which had 100% of their files problematic [14:04:36] MaxSem it is a great help for wikis that have like 250 files [14:05:04] ToAruShiroiNeko, http://dpaste.com/749328/ [14:05:06] perhaps also add "unlicensed" to the default delete reasons [14:05:37] that is a redirect tho [14:05:43] ahaha, redirects [14:05:46] http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:060528_snakehill.png&redirect=no [14:05:57] you would need to exempt/ignore redirects [14:06:44] try it on frp wiki [14:06:48] it has 87 files [14:06:55] I am guessing almost all are unlicensed [14:07:47] check for redirects makes it even slower [14:08:48] dont mediawiki know if it is a redirect or not? [14:09:14] you can retrieve non-redirect pages I believe [14:09:50] on all pages redirects would appear as italicised [14:15:29] sorry, got pinged in another channel [14:16:02] so the verdict is that we can't run it on wikis with any significant number of pages [14:16:48] even though the query is limited by namespace, the overall number of pages makes it slower [14:18:26] ToAruShiroiNeko, on frp: http://dpaste.com/749337/ [14:24:03] 78 files without templates [14:24:05] smooth [14:24:19] 87-78 = 9 [14:24:26] 9 files with templates on them [14:24:47] MaxSem how does mediawiki know about unused or uncategorised files? [14:25:46] the same way: by querying the database [14:28:23] MaxSem but those arent that expensive [14:28:37] O RLY? [14:28:49] function isExpensive() { [14:28:49] return true; [14:28:49] } [14:29:07] function isExpensive() { return MaxSem(); } [14:29:15] (this one from UncategorisedImages) [14:29:48] it is really hard to plow through so many files [14:30:06] youdon't have a TS account? [15:41:05] hi csteipp - thanks for working on the security talk materials for the Berlin hackathon. [15:59:53] Hey sumanah: You're welcome! Hopefully it will come together... [16:00:44] Hey folks: we're starting an office hours about Wikipedia Zero and other mobile work in #wikimedia-office, if you're interested. [16:30:18] hi there...i'm wondering what all is included in "View relevant changes" under [[Special:Watchlist]] [17:02:27] Hey subbu, good to see you here -- congrats on joining Wikimedia! It's going to be fun working with you again! [17:03:01] rsterbin: We are doing a quick stand-up now, should be ready to deploy in about 10 mins. Thanks for your patience! [17:03:08] sounds good [17:03:39] fabriceflorin, thanks :) [17:06:09] fabriceflorin: i'm going to switch the brackets on the permalink page real quick before deployment [17:11:22] RoanKattouw, fabriceflorin: all the fixes to the redesign commit are done [17:12:33] Prepping for 20% checkin. [17:14:12] Thanks, rsterbin and yoni_omniti: RoanKattouw is here with us physically on the 6th floor, training mlitn (Mattias) on how to deploy. [17:14:22] cool [17:14:34] I know preilly is working on the Git tutorial with Danielle, and Aaron is in a meeting for the next 45 min, so Nikerabbit is the other person I'd talk to, if he needed to talk about 20% [17:14:40] good news [17:15:39] rsterbin, yoni_omniti : Could you summarize for us what is ready to be deployed on your end? RoanKattouw just approved your central page redesign revisions and I told him you are tweaking the brackets fix as well. What are the big new items we are deploying today, from your perspective? [17:16:17] fabriceflorin, i'm done with the tweak [17:16:26] today's deployment includes the central feedback page and the redesign [17:16:53] note that JUST for this deployment, grayed-out "view activity" links are going away [17:17:21] they didn't work with the central page, so i've redone them as part of the permalink redesign [17:17:45] rsterbin: Thanks for the clarification about the grayed-out view activity. Aren't we also launching the abuse filter fix you made to work with werdna's new code? [17:17:53] Reedy: how are your Wikidata code reviews going? [17:17:54] NB: permalink redesign is finished as of today. i'll squash-merge and submit it to gerrit after deploy [17:18:22] fabriceflorin: yes, you're right. forgot about that. i should get a list of bug fixes... [17:19:38] rsterbin: Cool. A list of bug fixes / gerrit numbers would be great. Can you also remind us what Roan needs to do to clean up the relevance scores? We need to null certain values and update the SQL? Do we need to do anything to update the counters or are we good with that? [17:21:23] he'll need to clear out the relevance scores (set af_relevance_score and af_relevance_sort to null), then run sql/relevance_score.sql, then sql/filter_count.sql [17:22:14] no schema changes today [17:23:45] Wonderful, thanks for this summary, rsterbin ! [17:27:35] fabriceflorin: Bug fixes: 36768 (relevance score math), 36525 (activity log formatting), 36689 (changed line that appears on hidden/deleted mask), 36696 (added a loading message), 36703 (cursor on more link), 36502 (view feedback link on the talk page, config-controlled) [17:28:10] rsterbin: Wonderful! We just reviewed your first summary with RoanKattouw and it all sounds good. He was happy to hear there are no schema changes, and is ready to make the SQL changes for the relevance score. (I am live reporting all this because he is busy training a couple people on how to do this type of deployment). [17:28:26] great [17:30:17] rsterbin: Is there anything else we need to do today? I also want to triple check that we are not showing 'View feedback' on the Talk page yet (or 'Thanks, your feedback was ' in the feedback forms) -- that's all for next week. [17:31:13] * RoanKattouw shakes fist at AaronSchulz [17:31:20] fabriceflorin: those are both Mattias's features, but i can take a look [17:31:24] There was all sorts of undeployed stuff in wmf/1.20wmf3 apparently [17:31:43] includes/filerepo/backend/FileBackend.php | 71 ++++++++++++++ [17:31:45] .../filerepo/backend/FileBackendMultiWrite.php | 18 ++++ [17:31:46] includes/filerepo/backend/FileBackendStore.php | 103 +++++++++++++++----- [17:31:48] includes/filerepo/backend/FileOpBatch.php | 2 +- [17:31:49] .../phpunit/includes/filerepo/FileBackendTest.php | 66 ++++++++++--- [17:32:03] AaronSchulz: Is that stuff safe to deploy? I need to run scap soonish so it needs to either be OK to deploy or backed out immediately [17:32:27] hola [17:32:44] fabriceflorin: they should be ok [17:33:45] RoanKattouw: he's in a meeting for the next 30 min [17:33:56] Oh OK [17:40:22] rsterbin, fabriceflorin: OK the code is live on testwiki now [17:42:15] Oh hmm [17:42:22] I guess I should also deploy the AbuseFilter changes huh :D [17:43:19] that would be the most effective way to make them work ;) [17:44:52] haha [17:44:54] Working on that now [17:45:35] i'm not seeing the central feedback page or the redesign on testwiki...? [17:47:06] Hi rsterbin I am not seeing the new design on testwiki either ;o) RoanKattouw said it had not yet updated, should be there shortly. http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow [17:47:13] ok [17:52:02] OK AbuseFilter change is now live on test too [17:59:42] RoanKattouw: did you run do the relevance and count stuff on test? [17:59:49] Yes [18:01:23] Thanks, RoanKattouw ! I am not finding any bugs on the new feedback page design on testing, but I am seeing one bug in the central feedback page, which doesn't tally up the number of posts correctly: http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5 -- rsterbin, yoni_omniti, mlitn: There are a lot more than zero posts so far on testing, so this will need to be fixed in the next deployment. However it is not a show-stopper for this [18:01:24] deployment. [18:02:02] did we run the count script? [18:02:38] filter counts not being run would explain all the zeros, especially for the central feedback page [18:03:16] I think I ran it [18:03:37] 565 mwscript sql.php --wiki=testwiki relevance_score.sql [18:03:39] 566 mwscript sql.php --wiki=testwiki filter_count.sql [18:03:40] I definitely ran it [18:03:51] After setting all relevance scores to null [18:04:04] (update aft_article_feedback set af_relevance_score=null, af_relevance_sort=null;) [18:04:04] AaronSchulz: RoanKattouw wants to talk to you re undeployed stuff in wmf/1.20wmf [18:04:10] I know [18:04:13] * AaronSchulz just sat down again [18:04:19] RoanKattouw: it should be OK [18:04:24] OK [18:04:36] That was going to be my default assumption [18:04:53] If you didn't respond, I would've assumed it was fine, and then if it had broken I would've yelled at you for putting bad code in the deployment branch :) [18:04:54] I was about to do it and then went to a meeting ;) [18:05:02] nm [18:05:19] I am testing Abuse Filter on testing now. I have created a new filter called Shouting, copying all the same code that Reha had on prototype: http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/109 Next, I will test that it performs as intended and report back to you. [18:05:48] RoanKattouw: I'll just sync-dir it now [18:06:00] OK [18:06:37] RoanKattouw: can you run the filter counts script again, please? the central feedback page still says zero posts [18:07:15] Ok [18:07:23] done [18:09:19] Cool. I just tested the abuse filter and it correctly did not stop my shouting when I first tried it in default mode, but when I switched the setting to 'feedback' mode, it correctly auto-flagged this post: http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow/80 I think we are good to go on this front. Yoohoo! [18:10:53] Warning: Missing argument 4 for ApiArticleFeedbackv5Utils::renderMaskLine(), called in /home/wikipedia/common/php-1.20wmf3/extensions/ArticleFeedbackv5/Article [18:10:53] Feedbackv5.flagging.php on line 228 and defined in /home/wikipedia/common/php-1.20wmf3/extensions/ArticleFeedbackv5/api/ApiArticleFeedbackv5Utils.php on line 443 [18:11:44] OK, the Central Feedback page total number of posts is working as intended. Thanks, RoanKattouw and rsterbin ! [18:11:53] http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5 [18:11:59] :) [18:12:16] rsterbin, what else should we test that we haven't already? [18:12:23] rsterbin: See warning above ---^^ [18:12:52] hm [18:13:28] Is this a warning from the abuse filter? How can I reproduce this? [18:13:49] It's a code error [18:14:07] There shouldn't be anything to reproduce, it's a function being called wrongly [18:14:07] fabriceflorin, no, that's a php error from flagging on the special page [18:14:23] RoanKattouw: fixing now... [18:14:51] might be from my SHOUT comment while not logged in? [18:15:00] No I'm seeing a number of them [18:15:22] ok [18:17:39] Thanks, chrismcmahon ! I just changed the shouting filter to 'disallow' posts altogether, let's see if we get the correct action to display a message asking you to revise your post. [18:17:50] * chrismcmahon checks [18:18:09] RoanKattouw: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/7879 [18:18:58] fabriceflorin: not seeing the 'revise' notice [18:19:50] Hmm. worked correctly on my end, displaying this message: "Your post has been rejected by a software filter that suggests it may have violated Wikipedia's feedback guidelines. Please revise your post and try again." This forces you to change your message if you want to post it. Was your post completely ALL CAPS? (even one lower case character makes the post go through). [18:20:36] fabriceflorin: double-checking I have the right link, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden-crowned_Sparrow?aftv5_form=1&aftv5_link=E yes? [18:20:52] chrismcmahon: also, you need more than one word in all-caps. acronyms will pass through ok. [18:21:13] Hi Chris, we're still on testing. Here is the correct link: http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow [18:22:53] bah [18:24:12] Or warning fix deployed [18:24:29] *OK [18:24:40] rsterbin, fabriceflorin: Are we ready to go to production now? [18:24:42] Next, I will change the filter to give a warning, but allow the post to go through. The warning will not make much sense, because it says "'''Warning''': This action has been automatically identified as harmful. Unconstructive edits will be quickly reverted, [18:24:43] and egregious or repeated unconstructive editing will result in your account or IP address being blocked. If you believe this edit to be constructive, you may click Submit again to confirm it. A brief description of the abuse rule which your action matched is: $1" rsterbin: is there any way that we could automatically display our standard disallow message instead if an edit filter is tagged as 'feedback' instead of default? Or disable the [18:24:44] warning feature altogether? [18:25:23] fabriceflorin: no, i don't have any control over the abuse filter special page [18:25:43] I think we are ready to go to production, from my perspective. rsterbin, does this work for you, now that the warning has been fixed? [18:26:17] on prototype and enwiki i added a custom warning for abusefilter for general use [18:26:43] let me add one on test real quick... [18:26:55] rsterbin: couldn't we have 'abusefilter-warning' message be our standard message by default? Or would we need to ask werdna (Andrew Garrett) to do that on his end? [18:27:19] he'd have to tie it to the selection of a group via javascript [18:27:25] note that Special:ArticleFeedbackv5 is very broken in IE7, not sure about other IEs [18:27:35] chrismcmahon: Were you able to get the 'disallow' message on testing? I want to switch to 'warn' mode now. [18:27:42] it's not supported on ie7 [18:27:42] fabriceflorin: I was [18:28:00] fabriceflorin: bring on 'warn' mode [18:28:22] chrismcmahon: OK, warn mode is on. [18:28:24] rsterbin: aye. [18:30:00] fabriceflorin: i've added the aft warning message and set it on the shouting filter [18:30:15] minor nitpick, warning says "you may click Submit" but the name of the button is "Post your feedback" [18:30:40] Does all this talk mean we are not yet ready to push to prod? [18:30:41] http://test.wikipedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-feedback [18:30:45] fix at will ;) [18:30:57] chrismcmahon: We are not yet supporting IE7 -- at least not until June -- in fact you shouldn't be able to see anything on that platform yet. yoni_omniti, rsterbin I thought we had excluded IE7 from seeing AFT, can we fix that if we aren't already? chrismcmahon, let's include this link for volunteer testers to supported platforms for the June 7 test: http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Article_feedback/Version_5/Feature_Requirements#Platforms [18:31:15] OK per fabriceflorin I am now deploying to prod [18:31:17] ie7 is excluded on the front-end [18:31:35] fabriceflorin: it's not excluded from the special page, afaik [18:31:39] the check is not performed on the feedback page [18:32:50] No, let's go to production. chrismcmahon, the warning message is all wrong, as I was discussing with rsterbin, but we are looking into ways to prevent that wrong message from displaying in the next deployment, if feasible. [18:32:51] fabriceflorin: we'll need to discuss what should happen if you try to go to the special page with ie7 -- we'll need to have a message or something [18:33:19] fabriceflorin: we could also just train the abuse filter authors [18:34:22] yoni_omniti, rsterbin: yes, let's plan to either disallow unsupported platforms like IE7 from viewing the feedback page, or displaying a prominent message to warn them. chrismcmahon: Also note that IE7 support is not expected until END of June, so the volunteer testers should not test any platform other than the ones we now support, as linked above. [18:34:56] fabriceflorin: could you submit a bug, so it stays on our radar? [18:35:38] Changing messages locally is bad, mmmkay? [18:35:39] ;) [18:36:32] yes, I will submit bugs for both the platform issue and the warning issue for abuse filter. I sincerely doubt that filter editors can be trained, so I would rather have a software solution that disables warning messages, or it's going to get really confusing for end-users, as Chris just pointed out. [18:37:58] fabriceflorin: like i said, i don't have any control over the abuse filter special page. the best solution is going to be for andrew to select a set of available warning messages based on the group [18:38:09] interesting, all pages on test.wp.o throw an error in IE7, but enwiki is OK [18:38:34] I think there's already a BZ issue for that, checking... [18:40:19] rsterbin: OK, I will assign the warning feature request for abuse filter to Andrew Garrett (werdna) then. [18:40:26] thanks [18:41:46] chrismcmahon: Interesting finding. This suggests we may have introduced more IE7 issues when we implemented the new design. Something worth looking at, if we can identify exactly what is failing with the new design on testing that is not failing with the old design on production. Better write up these notes quickly, as the new design will be on production in a matter of minutes. [18:42:52] fabriceflorin: I have a feeling the IE7 thing is not related to AFT, pretty sure we've seen it before. [18:45:05] chrismcmahon: Cool, thanks for the heads-up. [18:55:18] MaxSem no I dont have a TS account [18:56:05] OK, we're almost live on production, and the abuse filter changes from Werdna are already live. So I changed the setting for the shouting filter 458 to be included in the 'Feedback' filter group, with only 'Auto-flag' action: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/458 [18:56:24] I included a note that it was recently implemented by Werdna (Andrew Garrett) to separate edit filter actions from feedback filter actions, and insure feedback doesn't affect condition limits for edit filters. [18:58:22] As soon as Roan gives us the go-ahead, we can test this condition on en-wiki. So far, the central activity log has not loaded with the new design yet: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5 (though something is starting to show up already) [19:00:37] * chrismcmahon is really looking forward to a viable beta labs cluster and some automated browser tests :) [19:00:46] RoanKattouw, rsterbin, yoni_omniti, chrismcmahon: Do you expect that we will need to wait for a while to get all the changes to production to show up? Do we need to clear our caches? In the past, JScript changes have taken up to several hours to show up consistently. Do you expect this to be the case here as well? Or is this a different kind of change. [19:00:48] fabriceflorin: do you want to set the group for the other feedback filters as well? [19:01:10] fabriceflorin: this is definitely a clearing-cache sort of change [19:01:25] messages, javascript, css [19:02:25] chrismcmahon: Me too. Have you checked with yoni_omniti to see if we could re-use his automated tests for Selenium on our end? OmniTI will be handing off this project to us in June, so we would definitely want you to get the tools and knowledge transfer in mid-June, before their contract ends on June 30. [19:03:18] after the FB changes, the tests will no longer run as they are dependent on specific attributes of the action links, elements structure etc. [19:03:29] Selenium limitations [19:03:57] the current tests are, however, part of the codebase [19:04:09] under the /tests directory [19:05:33] yoni_omniti, chrismcmahon: OK, I'm glad the tests are part of the codebase. Maybe we should set up a time for you, mlitn and Chris to debrief on this in mid-June, so we don't lose the knowledge. [19:06:08] sounds good [19:07:17] we're quite a ways out from having institutional browser tests, but using the ones that exist will be important. [19:08:15] OK, I am able to see the central feedback page with most of the elements in place now. RoanKattouw says it could take another 30 mins. or so for everything to propagate, so he will run the script to make sure the total number of feedback posts is correctly updated on that page. But it's cool to see all the feedback posts from all over Wikipedia show up in one central place: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5 [19:14:29] rsterbin yoni_omniti chrismcmahon : OK, production deployment is complete. RoanKattouw is now running the SQL scripts for central feedback page counter and relevance filter. [19:14:31] Alright, deployment done and SQL stuff run on enwiki [19:14:42] sweet, thanks [19:15:02] I just tested the shouting abuse filter in default mode and it is not trapping ALL CAPS, as intended: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden-crowned_Sparrow?aftv5_form=1 [19:16:46] chrismcmahon, thanks for your shout, which performs as intended, if you click on Details. Next, I will turn on that filter 458 to be in the 'feedback' filter group, so that it can auto-flag ALL CAPS. [19:17:07] fabriceflorin: that's because the group is set to default [19:17:59] 'Flag as abuse' seems to dtrt [19:19:19] rsterbin, chrismcmahon : I just enabled the shouting edit filter in the 'feedback' group: Is it auto-flagging your ALL-CAPS posts now? [19:19:24] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:AbuseFilter/458 [19:19:41] actually, maybe not [19:20:32] rsterbin: Do we include Bug 36909 in this deployment? - Article Feedback Links - Remove Options A and E links? https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36909 [19:20:41] multiple clicks on 'Flag as abuse' move the counts forward and backward, and behave differently in the list view and in the single view http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow/100306 [19:20:50] fabriceflorin: nobody's done that yet [19:24:15] Hi chrismcmahon, that's a really nice bug, would you mind filing it in Bugzilla, if you can reproduce consistently? Be sure to include 'aftv5-1.5' in the Keywords category. Congratulations! [19:25:07] chrismcmahon: i saw flagging count weirdness, but it looked like it was because more than one person was flagging/unflagging at the same time [19:25:54] rsterbin: I've been using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow/100306, trying a different one [19:27:10] rsterbin yoni_omniti: I just talked to RoanKattouw about this missing bug 36909. Is this something you could fix now, then send the Gerrit info to him? Since it's a simple change, he is prepared to do this after lunch. Oliver has been asking us to take care of this soon, because we are getting a lot of complaints about it. Which is why I had given it the 'Highest' priority, as discussed ;o) [19:29:04] chrismcmahon, rsterbin: I was able to confirm that the Abuse filter is working correctly, as it auto-flagged my ALL-CAPS comment here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:ArticleFeedbackv5/Golden-crowned_Sparrow/100313 [19:29:14] fabriceflorin: the last i heard, we were waiting on a date for it. but i can do that now... one sec. [19:29:32] fabriceflorin: just to confirm, link X (no link) should be at 100%? [19:30:33] fabriceflorin: will this mess up dario's stats? [19:31:54] I'm guessing clicking the "Flag as abuse" link should only ever increment the number and never decrement it? [19:32:29] chrimcmahon: yes [19:32:38] chrismcmahon: no, the second click should undo your flag [19:32:45] ^^ that [19:32:49] ah [19:33:06] but the link changes to "unflag …", right? [19:33:13] it should [19:33:22] oh, no [19:33:34] it goes from "flag as abuse" to "flagged as abuse" [19:33:47] rsterbin: Yes, please implement 36909 now and send the info by email to RoanKattouw, so he can fix after lunch. Otherwise, we will unleash Oliver on you ;o) (just kidding) Dario says it's OK from his standpoint. I knew we were missing something, but couldn't remember what ... [19:33:57] alright, should just be a minute... [19:34:07] rsterbin: and it only does that at 3 flags I think [19:34:40] chrismcmahon: it turns red at three; it does the flag/flagged every time [19:35:01] got it. not seeing any "Unflag" messages though. [19:35:02] chrismcmahon: rsterbin is right that 'Flag as abuse' works as a toggle. Once 3 people have flagged an item, it turns red. Once 5 people have flagged an item, it 'auto-hides'. [19:36:24] so reloading the page allows one user to further increment the count, bypassing the 'unflag' action, I see. [19:36:36] Looks like we are in pretty good shape with today's AFT deployment overall. Good job everybody! Going out to grab lunch now. Will be back at my desk in 20 mins or so. [19:38:28] RoanKattouw: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/7885 [19:38:46] fabriceflorin: link removal is ready for when Roan gets back [19:39:06] i gotta get some lunch now, too -- it's 3:30 here. [20:30:08] Thanks, rsterbin ! Sorry you had to wait so long to get your own lunch. :( RoanKattouw, it's all yours! It would be wonderful if you could deploy this ticket 36909 today: https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/7885 (happy to test it first, if you like, or we can test it directly on production, since it's pretty straightforward). (Here is its description: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36909) [22:38:54] RoanKattouw: are you available next Tue during the NPT deployment window? fabriceflorin tells me there is nothing scheduled for NPT itself but we will have some small code changes to Moodbar to push to production [22:39:27] I think he might be travelling then.. [22:39:33] ha [22:39:40] what about you Reedy ? :) [22:40:42] i'm about most of the day, bar a flight from 19:40-20:55 [22:41:09] Not in the office though [22:42:22] Oh, are you flying on Tuesday night? [22:42:25] I fly out Tuesday morning [22:42:32] DarTar: Yeah I'll be on a plane, flight leaves at 10:30am [22:43:07] I'm flying back from LAX to SFO [22:43:19] Ooooh [22:43:28] I didn't realize you'd be in LA [22:43:42] Thought you were just in the office through Wednesday [22:43:43] Reedy: working remotely from LA or ooo? [22:44:06] I've nothing specificly planned, so I'll most likely be online [22:44:24] What time is hte window? [22:44:45] hmm starts at 11 I think? [22:44:48] RoanKattouw? [22:45:10] NPT? It's 1-3pm I think [22:45:18] k thanks [22:45:25] will that work for you Reedy [22:45:26] ? [22:45:31] Can't check cause it's no longer on my calendar [22:45:37] But that's what it was last week [22:45:46] yeah it should be the same then [22:46:21] Yeah, I can do that [22:48:05] cool, mail for you