User talk:Kghbln/Archive/StructuredDiscussions/2016
| This page used the Structured Discussions extension to give structured discussions. It has since been converted to wikitext, so the content and history here are only an approximation of what was actually displayed at the time these comments were made. |
| Babel user information | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
- Stats
- Misc
Some stroopwafels for you!
edit
|
Thank you for help and encouragement on various MW.org tweaks. :) Varnent 20:26, 16 December 2011 (UTC) |
A barnstar for you!
edit
|
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
| For your truly awesome work on many wikis, in particular the Semantic MediaWiki one :) Jeroen De Dauw (talk) 15:02, 18 March 2012 (UTC) |
A beer for you!
edit
|
Thank you for your help though the program does confuse me quite a bit I appreciate you kindness in helping me if only you participated in adopting people then I would want you as a mentor have a beer in my kind offering to you. Kiki-kk (talk) 21:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC) |
A kitten for you!
edit_by_Ron.jpg)
Thank you for cool edit on Extension:SpecialDeleteOldRevisions2 ! It is late and my head is of... It's good that you are on guard!
mashup of Code and RawFile extensions
editThe following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi, I'm new here and I would like have a review on my little contribution: Extension:RawCodeFile
it mix two extension that I found useful but old and not maintened anymore.
The code is actually on our wiki using this extension to serve itself to you.
nice to meet you :) I would like to know what should I do now? Tuxun (talk) 21:44, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
- Heiya Tuxun, I changed the extension's page a bit. Hope you like it. Thanks for programming and publishing an extension! Apparently I am not a coder so I cannot review your extension. Probably you can ask on IRC or the tech mailing list for someone volunteering to help you with this. Cheers [[kgh]] (talk) 01:09, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks you very much, that was effectively what I needed! Tuxun (talk) 20:32, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
Extension Purge
edit- You just changed the status from unmaintained to stable. I made today some modifications to reflect the the new loading mechanism for extensions. Shall I contact now Tom Hutchison? I asked alreay today Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason if he minds if I maintain the extension for the moment (he does not mind). --Sigbert (talk) 11:47, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
- this all seems real legit.. hummm 66.87.78.129 (talk) 05:50, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
- This extension seemed to be unmaintained but still working for a while until I discovered Tom's version today. I guess it will be best if we all work on the code on GitHub to avoid heaps of forks and duplicate effort. So it will be great if you open a pull request on GitHub with your changes. Tom has been very helpful in the past and he could merge your adaptations in. [[kgh]] (talk) 11:53, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
Just wondering
edit| RESOLVED | |
| I support only easy fixes so it is labelled "unmaintained" as a precaution. | |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi just wondering why Extension:UserPageEditProtection is marked as unmaintained by you when it seems a new updated version just came two months ago and this version came out after the extension was marked as unmaintained. Was thinking of using the extension, but the unmaintained thing has me confused (especially since there's lots of extensions that seem not to have been updated, or changed, for a far longer time). Thanks for any insight you can gave. Christharp (talk) 16:23, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hi, this is a matter of caution. I am not really a programmer so I can only do basic stuff. In case something goes wrong I may not be able to fix it. Basically I do not want to make false promises and that is why I marked it as unmaintained. However I found this extension useful and this is why I have it deployed on some wikis. I do however think that it is not an overly complicated extension so in case something does not work it will hopefully be easy to find someone who can help. Cheers [[kgh]] (talk) 16:41, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
A kitten for you!
edit| RESOLVED | |
| Thank you for the kitten. :) | |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
boo
Terryarends (talk) 14:17, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
- Thanks a bunch. [[kgh]] (talk) 07:53, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
Changed status on UserPageEditProtection extension
edit| RESOLVED | |
| UserPageEditProtection works with the MediaWiki 1.27 branch. | |
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Hi I noticed that you changed the info box on UserPageEditProtectin from being unmaintained to stable. However you keep the note about the extension still being unmaintained, which leads me to believe that you found the extension currently works with 1.27. Am I making a correct assumption? As always thanks for any insights you can give. All the best to you Christharp (talk) 18:52, 30 October 2016 (UTC)
- Yes, this extension works with MediaWiki 1.27.x so we are safe till June 2019. :) When it comes to the overall status the following thread contains still valid information.
- It will be nice if you could post future extension specific questions on the extension's talk page since I am afraid that no other interested party will have a look here on my talk page. You can do a ping from there. [[kgh]] (talk) 19:52, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
Something Wicked This Way Comes
edit2017 wikitext editor - WMF's schizoid software series is spreading further [[kgh]] (talk) 12:51, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
- Seems nice at first glance, why do you think it is going to be bad ? Vedmaka 13:03, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
- It adds a dependency to a software (VisualEditor) which is still serving in alpha quality and slows down editing. I fear that this will also impact power users since switching between the modes currently appears to be an issue. I am not even speaking about wikis which cannot afford to run parsoid for one reason or the other. Still a long way to go. Let's see what happens. [[kgh]] (talk) 15:00, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, I did not dig it too much, thought it is going to be just a beautified UI for source editing. But if they're going to use Parsoid, it will be a really weird solution. Though, I see no reason for Parsoid there, because Parsoid primary task is to convert html into wiki markup and vise-versa, it's unnecessary when dealing with raw source code. We'll see. Vedmaka 18:19, 19 December 2016 (UTC)
- I also personally see no reason to use Parsoid, perhaps for switching somehow between the modes. Still, in case we need VisualEditor we also need Parsoid. [[kgh]] (talk) 21:13, 19 December 2016 (UTC)