[10:31:41] hi [10:32:03] * zhuyifei1999_ is also here [10:35:19] Ok I've read the logs [10:35:29] sorry that I was not around that much [10:35:46] I see you have been working on setting up the toollabs enviroment infobliss [10:36:01] I bit, yeah [10:37:44] I found out that I won't be able to be here tomorrow at 13:00 UTC, so I'll hang out here today and tomorrow a few hours before that [10:38:12] infobliss: If you're here shoot me a ping. I'd like to go over a few small organisational things [10:39:16] hi [10:39:33] Hi [10:39:49] Are you also on https://wikimedia.zulipchat.com infobliss? [10:39:59] Ah yes [10:40:05] I registered [10:40:22] * zhuyifei1999_ prefers to stick with irc [10:40:49] Yes zhuyifei1999_ we'll do that for our project, but we also have to keep an eye on zulipchat [10:41:10] Shristi is giving some of the important updates over there [10:42:42] Aah I see we should be looking at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Google_Summer_of_Code_2017#Recommended_Steps_for_Current_Students [10:42:49] we have to write a blog and update it weekly. [10:44:01] Yes, well you have to write that ;) [10:44:21] Oh sure. I will ;) [10:45:07] Is that on the wordpress or somewhere else? [10:46:18] I thought a blog anywhere is okay [10:46:20] I'm not sure, I think an option is also on your user page on MediaWiki [10:46:46] ok [10:48:54] I think it is a good idea to log a bit of what you did (small updates) somewhere (maybe phabricator)? [10:49:40] Ok [10:50:14] And your first blog post can be a bit about your first impressions [10:50:21] I have been a little busy last two days. Today I was doing OAuth consumer registration. [10:51:20] well that's good progress already, getting toollabs and OAuth working, they are the kind of things where you can get huge problems if they don't work [10:52:11] yeah :) [10:52:18] Do you suggest me to update the weekly reports task in phabricator? [10:52:55] I'm not sure how the weekly reports and the blogs relate to eachother [10:54:19] ok but for logs(small updates) where do you suggest me to write them? [10:54:59] I would suggest use the weekly reports for the small updates (and list them by week) [10:55:09] and then link from there to a weekly blog post [10:55:47] where the logs are purely factual and short, and the blog post can be a bit more your story working through the project [10:56:48] ok got it. [10:57:50] @zhuyifei1999 what should be the "Applicable project:" in the OAuth consumer registration form? [10:59:09] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:OAuthConsumerRegistration/propose [10:59:48] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T164555 [11:00:35] Is OAuth connected to a specific tool-name? [11:00:49] if so would it be a good idea to finalize which name were going to be using [11:01:04] infobliss: looking [11:01:16] commons [11:01:23] ok [11:01:34] basvb: yes [11:01:44] but we can create a test one [11:02:01] then throw it into trash after the test is done [11:02:06] True [11:02:28] yes toolwise we have to make venv. [11:02:33] although for the name: I think sooner is better than later in changing it [11:04:31] glam2commons is good. [11:04:48] what do you say zhuyifei1999? [11:05:23] I don't have a strong opinion [11:11:30] Ok, but you didn't really like SIBU, correct? [11:11:51] definitely not sibu [11:12:15] "single" vs "batch"... no [11:12:15] and glam2commons, is okeyish for you, but not a real "aah perfect" [11:12:27] yep [11:12:59] I don't really see a better alternative around, so I think we'll go for glam2commons [11:13:43] okay [11:13:49] it just don't show how this one is different from eg gwtoolset [11:14:15] hmm [11:14:24] so elements which make it different are: metadatamapping [11:14:34] as in that is done already [11:14:51] so it is the end users (wikipedia writers) uploading images [11:15:18] and they could be any wikimedia user, no technical skills needed, or maybe the skills of being able to upload an image to commons [11:15:58] it's like a "share on Wikimedia (Commons)" button [11:16:02] ok [11:16:04] like they have "tweet this image" [11:16:12] not too bad [11:16:47] I'm just thinking out loud, hope to get some ideas from that [11:17:24] 1. share2commons [11:17:33] no [11:17:47] 2. glamshare [11:17:51] the share on commons is the perspective from the glamside [11:18:04] yes that is more in the direction [11:18:13] we have to think how it fits within the Wikimedia landscape [11:18:20] there the glam aspect is an important part [11:19:55] glam2commons catches well what the tool does, but has some issue with differentiating from other tools which overlap in the "moving images from glams to commons" function [11:19:57] I'd say glam2commons is a tiny bit better than glamshare [11:20:37] share without a target is no good [11:20:59] glam2commonsMadeEasy [11:21:36] uh [11:22:22] target is included and we want tomake the flow easy [11:22:28] ok so, flickr2commons is a batch tool, url2commons is a batch tool, video2commons is a one-at-a-time tool [11:22:28] but the name is too long [11:22:35] exactly [11:23:13] basvb: what other glam -> commons tools besides gwtoolset are there? [11:23:14] This tool will start as one-at-a-time, but eventually could also be batch [11:23:58] v2c's batch will be in the very far future [11:24:13] pattypan is promoted quite a bit recently [11:24:28] it is more excel based I believe [11:24:43] * zhuyifei1999_ looks [11:24:51] + there is people writing their own scripts (that;s what I do) [11:25:10] pattypan is more general purpose [11:25:51] yeah looks very general purpose to me [11:26:35] It is created by Yarl [11:26:55] well you need a spreadsheet with information [11:27:17] and you often have that when there is some archiving done on the images (which generally glams do) [11:27:39] then there is the glampipe tool [11:27:48] I contacted susanna anas about that [11:28:08] And one of the developers also reacted on Phabricator with some pointers [11:29:02] yeah I too read that. [11:29:06] what's the difference between this project and glampipe? [11:29:55] glampipe also focusses on the technical user (preparing metadata mappings) [11:30:43] I think we should lay the focus on making it easy for the re-user, and for uploading files which can not be uploaded as a whole collection [11:31:25] https://github.com/artturimatias/GLAMpipe a node-based tool [11:31:46] When not 100% of the collection can just be dumped on Commons with a good mapping. But something has to happen: selection of suitable images (license or scope), adding information (categories, other) [11:33:26] yeah I guess glam2commons isn't as bad as I thought [11:33:27] I'm not familiar with what node-based is. Is that just connecting sub-code parts which all have their own function? [11:33:37] glampipe doesn't seem to upload, does it? [11:33:47] oh I meant nodejs [11:33:51] aah ok [11:34:05] because there is also something with connecting nodes in that project [11:34:17] oops sorry [11:34:24] I expect there is some way to upload in there [11:35:05] hmm, it does not seem to be the focus [11:35:14] maybe they expect upload with pattypan or gwtoolset? [11:35:22] yeah [11:35:28] batching tool [11:35:46] "give the power of bots without having to write code" [11:36:04] is that for glampipe or for us? [11:36:48] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Susannaanas/GLAMpipe#What_is_your_solution.3F [11:36:53] last sentence [11:37:24] yes [11:37:49] So GWtoolset, glampipe and pattypan have power users all as their end user [11:38:00] we also need power users, to set up things for a new GLAM [11:38:18] but our end user are the re-users within Wikimedia (every Wikimedia user) [11:38:51] I'll go about renaming some thing (on Phabricator) later today [11:38:59] request whether that is possible [11:39:42] We also have to have some important discussions on tool design (not looks but how it works more precisely) soon I think [11:42:51] yeah. Design means as to what will the work flow? We already have some idea about that. [11:47:41] Yes, I think the solution from finland to use the full url is a smart one [11:48:38] ok [11:49:09] url will be unique [12:08:04] it will often have something we can derive the unique ID within the API from [12:09:40] ok [12:10:21] imo, we should support both url, and name_of_glam + id [12:11:04] sounds good.