Template talk:Skin/Flow

Previous page history was archived for backup purposes at Template talk:Skin/LQT Archive 1 on 2015-08-17.

I liked to add an entry themes= in the Template Skin to display the provided themes by the skin and add a category entry in Category:Skin with themes.

for grouped translations, why parameters are not in a template data structure ? -- Christian 🇫🇷 FR (talk) 13:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Aren't these practically the same thing? Given that there isn't a formal review process to make this determination I think it suffices to have one or the other.

No. They're not same. This is literally explained in the page

The keyword was "practically". Experimental to me means incomplete which is a type of broken. "Unmaintained" also overlaps in the event that the skin has broken because it hasn't been maintained. So I guess the bigger question is whether this label exists to track the specific development progress of the skin, which in itself is a burden to maintain and difficult to qualify without a standard of review, or whether it exists to tell a potential wiki admin whether the skin is in a deployable state or not, which is fairly apparent from trial and error. Is there an objection to condensing the status values with the goal of being more objective and informative?

"Experimental to me", that shows you're applying your own definition, and ignoring the contextual definition given there. If that's the case, then there's no difference; but to you, of course.

To every other person reading the template doc:

• unstable label means broken - do not use this skin.
• experimental label means this is in early stages of development and may change drastically.

This may or may not conform with how the terms are used elsewhere, and that's fine. But here, and in this template more specifically, that's how they should be used.

The template assumes the group id is "mediawiki-skin-X". But for the skins at GitHub the group id is "mwgithubskin-X". It should be configurable.

Should probably be set up like for Template:Extension

How are we supposed to handle that with this template?

This post was posted by Paladox2017, but signed as Isarra.

I do not think the template was written with that use case in mind. I did not try this, but from looking at the template I think it should work to supply whatever you want in the author param (e.g. some comma-separated list of author's names). If you then leave the username empty, no broken links to some non-existent user talk page will be generated.