[04:32:13] I'm new and just set up a wiki. How do I change access/viewing permissions? [04:33:35] !access [04:33:35] For information on customizing user access, see . For common examples of restricting access using both rights and extensions, see . [04:33:42] Hi Vhelmon. Those two links should help. ^ [04:38:43] Okay, that was helpful [04:38:43] Another question [04:39:18] How do make it so I can access my wiki even when I am not at my main computer? [04:39:18] Right now, I just have it as localhost [04:39:57] I don't know what the public web address is, assuming there even is one currently [04:42:22] Is it just as easy as changing the $wgServer value? [04:42:37] Right now it's just $wgServer = "http://localhost"; [04:51:17] You'll need to expose your Web server to the public Internet. [04:51:33] And possibly attach a domain name to it by registering one and pointing it to an IP address of your home computer. [04:52:23] How do I do those (or at least, where can I find how to do those)? [11:03:46] Hi I wish to talk to an outreachy mentor [15:23:52] Hmm [15:24:26] I make a valid suggestion and get "attitude" that isn't something the "community" wants even when it was an intended option for disscussion anyway [15:24:30] Why do I bother? [15:24:34] :( [15:24:43] *that it isn't [15:24:53] ShakespeareFan00: Well, at least you get the opportunity to make vague reference to it in an IRC channel. [15:25:51] Yvette: The suggestion was for some sort of font support for older works ( On a phabricator ticket) [15:26:36] The response was to place the suggestion at lowest priority, and tell me in effect to shut up as the community wasn't expressing any need or preference for it. [15:26:56] So much for "Be bold" [15:26:59] :-) [15:27:04] T160261 [15:27:04] T160261: Implement support to allow use of alternate typefaces on English Wikisource for archaic documents. - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T160261 [15:27:10] If you want closed standards, don't run a Wiki! [15:28:13] but I am not going to say that in the thread as it wouldn't be reasonable in a technical disscusion [15:29:19] I got simmilar attitudes when I sugggested that {{ts}} be implemented much more closely in the core of mediawiki [15:31:40] one could add references to that font in MediaWiki:Common.css but of course the font file should be on a WMF server to prevent privacy issues [15:34:27] True [15:34:40] but I've had some problems with the 0.78 version of the font in some applications [15:34:50] (Have asked the devloper to sanity check it.) [17:56:35] Hello [17:57:46] Is anyone active here? [18:01:22] SAP34: probably not on a Sunday [18:01:37] * SAP34 frowns [18:03:15] SAP34: How can we help you? [18:04:08] I was wondering if someone could set up a database server where I can host my own MediaWiki installation. I've tried numerous hosting services and none of them meet my needs, and neither does Bitnami. However, I do not have enough skill to set up and run a server of my own [18:04:45] Umm, there are a variety of people who do this sort of thing (Usually for a fee) [18:04:50] Try ShoutWiki [18:05:03] Already tried [18:05:23] I've tried just about everything at https://mediawiki.org/wiki/Hosting_services [18:05:30] And had no success [18:05:49] why no success? [18:06:38] The services either A). Charged a ridiculous amount of money or B). Didn't offer complete freedom with your installation [18:07:50] What freedoms did ShoutWiki not offer? [18:08:04] Well you can't both have someone do it for you, and give you complete freedom, and be part of a generic wiki farm [18:08:32] If you want complete freedom and someone to do it for you, its probably going to cost a lot of money, because you're hiring a consultant to set up your wiki one on one [18:08:46] And that's usually pretty expensive [18:08:51] Lcawte I don't like that ShoutWiki restricts so many features to only staff, and that each wiki doesn't have its own independent Special:ListUsers page [18:09:06] I understand features like CheckUser and UserLookup are restricted [18:09:24] but common sysop tasks like RevisionDelete and Importing should not be IMHO [18:10:22] I also think that members of the steward group should be able to add/remove that group [18:10:44] I mean, did you ever file a support ticket with us? [18:11:07] Wait a minute: is Lcawte ShoutWiki staff? [18:11:55] I don't want to be talking to someone with a bias [18:11:58] SAP34: I am... I'm asking more for feedback on what we can do better. [18:12:55] I've basically said it. Give each individual wikis their own user list, allow sysops to use RevisionDelete and import tools, and allow members of the steward group on individual wikis to add/remove that group [18:13:33] SAP34: [For bias disclosure, I suggested ShoutWiki because I know a bunch of people who are involved, although I personally am not involved] [18:14:34] Did you judge all of that off defaults or did you file a ticket and get told those things were not available to you? [18:15:17] Well, RevisionDelete is listed under "staff only features" [18:15:20] By add/remove that group, I'm assuming you mean add/remove users? I agree with that. [18:15:35] Stewards should be able to add new stewards and remove existing stewards [18:15:47] But a steward should not be able to remove themselves from that group [18:16:20] And I don't understand why each individual wikis don't have their own user list by default [18:16:32] And what on earth the troll usernames that are a bunch of repeating numbers are doing [18:17:31] I also think that ShoutWiki staff should not have their permissions exist on a local wiki unless they assign it using userrights-interwiki from ShoutWiki Hub [18:17:35] It's a shared user database, it's a feature you'll find on the large majority of wiki farms. There is meant to be an extension in place that filters out user names of people who haven't actually edited that wiki, although I'll have to look in to making sure that's working. [18:18:04] You could use CentralAuth - that's what Miraheze uses [18:18:07] And WMF uses it [18:18:24] That will allow global linking of accounts but local accounts do not exist unless that user visits that wiki [18:19:11] I don't like the fact that there are members of the ShoutWiki staff group on a local wiki, but then when you attempt to edit the userrights of that user, the "staff" checkbox is not checked [18:19:32] Global userrights is something that I do not support from the bottom [18:20:14] I also don't like the EditAccount extension - it's concerning having staff have the ability to change a user's email and password [18:20:30] Nor do I like having staff users being "unblockable" [18:20:38] Need I say more? [18:23:48] I would also like the AbuseFilter extension to be included by default, and of course access to CheckUser and Oversight would be handy, though I'm not going to push that [18:24:03] I think I've made my point loud and clear [18:24:04] SAP34: For the record, CentralAuth is actually a terrible extension [18:24:14] In your opinion [18:24:19] No [18:24:24] In most peoples opinions [18:24:28] It's a hack for WMF [18:24:49] The fact that Miraheze uses it is probably a giant red flag for that wikifarm [18:24:52] IMHO it's better than having a global user list where all users exist on all wikis automatically, even if the user account is disabled or has never edited [18:25:12] I prefer to have global accounts only exist on local wikis if that user visits that wiki [18:25:43] My point is that I've tried just about every hosting service and have not been satisfied [18:26:12] Just run your own then [18:26:15] CentralAuth adds a lot of complexity, and will make things much more complicated and likely to explode [18:26:16] Installing mediawiki isn't hard [18:26:34] I don't have enough knowledge to run and maintain server infrastructure myself [18:26:50] That's why I was asking if someone could set one up for me? [18:29:12] There's certainly people who will do that for you, with precisely what you want, but if you want it precisely customized to exactly your needs, you need to hire a MediaWiki consultant [18:29:17] There's a list at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Professional_development_and_consulting [18:29:39] Expect to pay somewhere in the neighbourhood of $75/hour depending on how experianced a person you get [18:30:35] I won't need someone working constantly [18:30:57] just someone to set up the server and create the initial installation files [18:31:01] I can take it away from there [18:32:18] Well the sort of people on that list will do that for you. They generally charge per hour, so if you just need the initial setup, they will only charge you how long that takes [18:32:49] There's various providers like DreamHost that do one click installs [18:32:56] I don't know how customisable they are though [18:34:57] Ka-Ching [19:27:55] Hello! I was hoping that I could find some help here. [19:28:11] !ask agdhruv [19:28:11] Please feel free to ask your question: if anybody who knows the answer is around, they will surely reply. Don't ask for help or for attention before actually asking your question, that's just a waste of time – both yours and everybody else's. :) [19:28:48] I will keep that in mind wm-bot. [19:29:25] I want to contribute to MediaWiki. I am utterly confused. I downloaded the core. What next? [19:29:49] !start agdhruv [19:29:50] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_become_a_MediaWiki_hacker [19:30:46] I went to his link. I am stuck in a technical situation now. How do I run the code on my localhost? [19:31:33] agdhruv: Some people find vagrant easier to set up [19:31:50] it's a web application, you usually need it to be published on a web server, and use a browser to navigate to it [19:31:51] but if you're not using vagrant, first step - make sure php, apache and mysql are installed [19:31:58] !vagrant [19:31:58] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki-Vagrant [19:32:50] I have MAMP installed. I have the "core" directory in my localhost folder as well. [19:35:49] Looking at http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3874064/how-to-open-a-website-hosted-in-mamp-on-the-mac you probably need to browse http://localhost:8888/core/ [19:37:43] Thank you for the help. :) [19:52:50] https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/User:ShakespeareFan00/Sandbox#Junicode [19:53:00] The top and bottom should be showing the same thing [19:53:22] Suggestions on why it's so HARD to get mediawiki to cope with a simple inlined font-family appreciated [19:53:25] ShakespeareFan00: try #wikisource [19:53:33] SAP34@ No-one home [19:54:49] ShakespeareFan00: Don't blame us for that, that's the browser's fault :P [19:58:09] ShakespeareFan00: But in this particular case, because ULS has loaded a font named Junicode, but nobody has loaded a font named JunicodeRegular [19:58:54] Or it would seem the Italic version [19:59:13] Junicode seems to override the Italic '' '' notation the Lorem is inside [19:59:27] I have a font called Junicdoe installed locally [19:59:49] Nominally Junicode and JunicodeRegular should be the same font [20:00:07] For me, the italic text is using https://en.wikisource.org/w/extensions/UniversalLanguageSelector/data/fontrepo/fonts/Junicode/Junicode-Italic.woff2?3fe39 as the font [20:00:09] but Windows play sill *&^% when it comes to being pedantic about font names [20:00:29] * bawolff doesn't have Junicode installed [20:00:45] Screen shot please? [20:00:51] Try playing with the fonts tab in the firefox developer console [20:01:11] I don't see a Font tabs [20:02:04] I don't know how to take screenshots on macs [20:02:41] To be clear, i mean i get Junicode Italic on the top paragraph. The bottom is not Junicode italic [20:03:23] I don't get Italic on the top DESPITE having the Entire 0.78 Release (TTF) locally installed [20:03:35] Seems like Windows is playing *&^% with font names :( [20:03:55] Consistency for users? Hah (sigh) [20:04:05] Maybe its because you have it installed locally [20:04:47] Well I am puzzled as to why it's not doing it Italic in the top example when it does in the bottom [20:04:56] It SHOULD be the same font [20:05:36] and the lorem ipsum should be italic in both versions [20:05:46] because Mediawiki should be telling it so [20:06:18] Yet fo some reason other than a brief momentary second as the page loads, the top reverts to non italic.... [20:06:41] Also I enabled some font features in both examples [20:06:55] They only seem to have any actual impact in the top example, [20:07:21] So I'll ask again, why is it so hard to do what should be a simple inlined font selection? [20:07:43] ShakespeareFan00: The @font-face rule for Junicode italic has a src: local( "Junicode" ) [20:07:44] I think that might be wrong [20:07:51] Or do I have to regretably inform the font's developers it's corrupt? [20:08:08] I think that might be telling the browser to use the non-italic version for italics if it happens to be installed locally [20:08:18] but I don't know anything about @font-face so I might be wrong [20:08:26] Which font-face:? [20:08:31] The one for Mediawiki? [20:08:39] Or the one in your local browser? [20:09:13] The dev console isn't showing any donwloaded remtoe fonts [20:10:34] huh, I can't find where its defined [20:11:00] It should be showing as Italic [20:11:44] I think the @font-face rules comes from ULS [20:12:34] So maybe a bug in ULS [20:12:41] So what's causing it to NOT select the Italic version? [20:13:00] its hould be looking for JunicodeItalic right? [20:13:53] Annoyingly Firefox 52.0's dev console won't let me copy what it thinks the font-face is into a pastebin [20:14:42] I think the @font-face rule is supposed to have [20:14:46] local('Junicode Italic' ) [20:14:54] instead it has local('Junicode' ) [20:15:08] Can I leave this with you? [20:15:17] ok [20:15:38] I am also not sure why Selecting the Redular font should disable all the font-features selected [20:15:49] and cause such weired behaviour with 'hist' [20:16:13] which based on the behaviour on other sites should be doing medial long s final short s [20:16:24] It may of course depend on the version of the font. [20:16:46] I am talking to the developer of the font at the moment on something else so... [20:17:03] I've asked them to sanity check the font tables... in case it's my OS being pedantic [20:18:28] In the Second Example it's not even using Junicode... [20:18:44] Its pulling Linux Libertine , so something's f**d up [20:23:16] bawollf: Mediwiki seems to be pulling the font from an external repo [20:23:29] It's not using my locally installed version at all it seems [20:32:15] It should be pulling the Italic version - src: local("Junicode"), url("/w/extensions/UniversalLanguageSelector/data/fontrepo/fonts/Junicode/Junicode-Italic.woff2?3fe39") format("woff2"), url("/w/extensions/UniversalLanguageSelector/data/fontrepo/fonts/Junicode/Junicode-Italic.woff?c458b") format("woff"), url("/w/extensions/UniversalLanguageSelector/data/fontrepo/fonts/Junicode/Junicode-Italic.tt [20:32:17] f?7f30d") format("truetype"); but I'm not seeing it, the remote versions are correctly named, the local one isn't.... Hmm [20:46:42] bawollf [20:46:47] Tooke the local copy out [20:46:49] It worked [20:46:51] :) [20:47:07] I don't really know enough about ULS to fix it, but I filed https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T160300 [20:47:16] So ULS mangled the local portion somehow [20:47:37] in the javascript file, it looks like it just doesn't read the right variable name for the local portion [20:49:46] So it was bug? [20:49:50] Wow [20:50:21] bawollf: What I was trying to set up was the same style as here- http://www.yourphotocard.com/Ascanius/Gladsmuir.htm# [20:52:38] I will (wrongly assume) that it would be possible to set up a font-face rule for something called 'Seventeenth' that sets up an aliased version of Junicode with an appropriate feature set like that on the page i linked? [20:53:28] Then all I'd need to do is say font-family: Seventeenth in a font-family call in a

or

at English Wikisource ;) [20:53:33] On wiki, you'd need to set it up in MediaWiki:Common.css [20:53:42] you can't do it from an inline style [20:53:57] Ah OKay [20:54:12] But technically feasible? [20:54:24] Is there a test wiki where this could be done? [20:54:27] technically. Or you could get the language team to fix ULS [20:55:02] ULS is about modern langauges I thought, not about arachic one [20:55:28] Well part of ULS is webfonts [20:55:36] How do I contact the ULS team, Phab? [20:55:51] They should hopefully see the bug i just filed [20:56:21] bawolff: HAve you seen my earlier request? [20:56:32] Which one? [20:56:33] About better support for older forms? [20:56:37] Let me dig it up [20:56:57] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T160261 [20:57:49] It seems this is something for the ULS people as well [20:58:08] Espeically if Junicode is ALREADY on a Wikimedia repository somewhere [20:58:18] It's in ULS [20:58:28] We also use ULS for some fonts for Dyslexics too [20:59:01] Reedy: The background to this is that i was trying to typset something at Wikisource as detailed in the Ticket I just linked [20:59:21] Some modern fonts don't have the support for variant forms most notably long-s [20:59:49] Junicode does, and sorting out the long-s behaviour is something I am speking with one of the font's devleopers about [21:00:00] I've noted a possible alternative font in the ticket [21:00:24] Feedback in the ticket would be appreciated... [21:01:50] The ticket could be more clear in what exactly its asking for [21:04:22] "Allow using webfont X in en.wikisource for some texts" [22:16:30] I can re-tiltle or file a new ticket? [22:17:13] Anyway i need a computer break [22:17:15] * ShakespeareFan00 out [22:17:16] yes you can [23:50:18] Hello everybody! I'd like to talk to an admin. Is it possible?