[06:29:18] I'd like to use this dialog (minus the review/preview stuff) in my extension. Is it reusable? https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/146040/69402895-79ea2700-0cf9-11ea-9b12-261b29cc4355.png [06:30:02] I'm just interested in the UI bit. Already have JS that takes care of the save action. [08:15:31] Hi, is there a way via the API to flush watchlists of specific users? We have the problem atm, that some email adresses of old users are no longer valid. Still on page changes, they get notified which produces a lot of bounced email notifications, that we'd like to avoid [08:16:14] Or is there a general way on how to handle this? Does changing a user to inactive remove the watchlist notifications? [09:01:11] What would also solve my problem, if I could use a different sender email adress for the watchlist changes I suppose [15:15:05] hello. which channel is to talk about a language converter development? it, converter i made, is not accepted yet, i would like to ask somebody to review it. [15:16:28] one person requested me to reformat it, separate classes, but maybe really i need not? [15:17:31] We try and follow the class per php file format (at least for new code) [15:17:39] So it doesn't sound an unrealistic ask [15:18:35] And chances are our automated code style tools will reject it too [15:20:06] Reedy, there is class per php, but grammar functions can be separated into separate class [15:20:20] Without a reference patch, it's hard to comment on specifics [15:20:33] For me, it would be by example [15:20:37] Do we do that currently? [15:20:51] but that functions do not form a good grammar class, i think it is premature optimisation, and i am lazy to do that [15:21:23] * Reedy shrugs [15:21:29] As above, without seeing code I cannot comment [15:21:37] And I don't know who left said comment [15:21:47] And as such, whether they're considered authorative etc [15:22:07] Reedy, https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/mediawiki/core/+/164049/ [15:23:32] He doesn't seem to be asking for seperate classes [15:23:36] Just smaller commits [15:23:55] Reedy, "Please, please split this in multiple ways: multiple smaller classes, each introduced in a separate patch, each covered by a separate set of test cases. Ideally all this code is created first as part of a separate library in a separate Git repository. You can use GitHub or ask for one here on Gerrit. If this library is solid, well tested and reviewed, it will be much easier to add and use it in MediaWiki core." [15:25:24] if this is accepted it is just working. why to bother with useless separations? [15:26:28] dinar: because it makes it easier to review [15:27:46] dinar: So... In the first instance, this needs rebasing and the tests need to pass on jenkins [15:27:54] After that... Is this something actually wanted by the community? [15:28:41] (speaking of the tests, the links in the jenkins message seem to 404) [15:28:58] Skizzerz: because it's over a year old [15:29:02] We don't keep them very long [15:29:05] ah [15:29:09] X tests or Y time I think [15:29:19] So hence my comment about it really needs rebasing before anything further [15:29:21] makes sense, didn't think to check the time [15:31:03] there were many discussions so it must be wanted [15:31:44] I note that none of this seems to be documented on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T27537 [15:31:47] Which is helpful to have [15:31:49] this converter is referred at https://tt.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0%D1%80_%D0%92%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B8%D1%8F%D1%81%D0%B5#TATLAT [15:32:55] none of this - what do you mean/refer? discussions? [15:33:07] Yes [15:33:16] We generally consider things like "community consensus" [15:33:18] ie the people want it [15:33:25] Not just one random person pushing a specific agenda [15:33:40] some of them are referred in the gerrit comments and code comments [15:34:18] i used to write in gerrit, i like forgot about phabricator, i did not knew its importance [15:36:05] several wikipedians asked me about the situation in facebook chat [15:36:32] near a year ago, i have said them about this situation... [15:37:33] I just rebased the patch FWIW [15:37:36] Let's see what CI has to say [15:48:54] "Not just one random person pushing a specific agenda" - actually i am not the person who pushes this, because i generally dislike how this latin and also cyrillic alphabets are designed. for example, cyrillic/latin letter e is used for "i/e" sound, while there is also real "e" sound in words like "electron". it makes confusions with european languages and with turkish language. [15:51:05] i am a programmer here, and they decided to use some authoritative alphabet, like all wikipedia is made, with authoritative sources, so i programmed using some governmental latin projects. [15:51:28] I wasn't saying you were [15:51:32] But it has happened before [15:51:44] Which is why we try to get "community consensus" for changes that change big things [15:52:44] there are links to discussions here: https://tt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Кулланучы:Qdinar [15:53:14] i will try to invite here a wikipedian now [15:54:30] he is offline right now [15:54:34] in facebook [16:00:11] i was wrong, there are no links to discussions in gerrit comments [16:00:53] Please feel free to document this in the phab task so there's a more permenant history [16:03:26] also not in code [16:22:51] i said "i think it is premature optimisation" - it is not optimisation, but, little refactoring [16:37:36] Reedy, i have written a comment , https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T27537#5684929 , using texts from here. [16:58:46] Reedy, i see you changed nparts to parts, i think that is wrong [16:59:31] i think nparts means newparts [17:35:34] dinar: Maybe so, but from the code it's hard to tell [17:35:36] It's undefined before hand [17:35:41] And isn't used after [17:35:46] So it doesn't seem to have any point [17:36:43] or maybe I misread because distracted