Talk:MediaWiki feature request and bug report discussion

From Meta

Jump to: navigation, search

How do i find out what requests have been made, as it appears there have been hundreds, i only see the few that are listed here. I think wikipedia and all the other wikimedia projects are wonderful and i'd like to congrdulate them but i also want to find out a few things about vaguely technical issues.

I'd like to know:

  • if articles are (or can be) rated? like slashdot for example, or some other system where the best written articles get best positions?
  • if the user interface can be changed beyond the ones given in the options? as i want to be able to change text styles,colours, backgroung and layout so i can read and organise better and make it look prettier, i find it easier to read white on blue for instance
  • if invididual articles can be compiled by the best bits of several articles, to become one improved article? at the moment it seems that people only edit the article on what's already written rather that saying one bit is rubbish and needs a complete rewrite or take a bit from a similar article
  • if articles can share the same name but different ratings and therefore the best written article will make it? at present it seems that if there is an article written already then no one writes another as the name has already gone and people willl not then find the intended article, or someone elses

Not sure how coherent or plausable these things are but if some could point me to somewhere i can find answers to some or all of these questions i'd appreciate it greatly.

If this is the wrong place for this i'd appreciate someone informing me where it should be, thanx

Flufybumblebee Jan 2006

Why on Earth do you want to build in a delay in bug report submission? Bug reports don't need to be top quality. If a sourceforge bug report is nonsensical you can always post a comment to that effect. Also, many feature requests are unequivocally a good idea, and the only thing that is stopping them from being implemented is lack of developer time. There is no need to delay submitting such requests.

Dori points out on en:Wikipedia talk:MediaWiki namespace text that not everyone knows how to use sourceforge. That's fine. Such people can submit their bug reports here, and someone who knows how to use sourceforge can make a proper submission. The sourceforge tracker is useful in that it allows developers to prioritise and assign. This is sufficiently useful that the developers often submit bug reports themselves, that are originally reported via a variety of communication channels. You can help developers by submitting bug reports directly.

Note that urgent bug reports should be sent directly to developers. The IRC channel (#wikipedia at irc.freenode.net) is useful for this purpose.

-- Tim Starling 23:43, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

There needs to be a sensible way of archiving this page, or the archives will end up huge and useless. Two categories of archive that might be useful are MediaWiki feature request and bug report discussion/Decided against, for features that people do not want supported, and MediaWiki feature request and bug report discussion/Submitted to Sourceforge. Particularly long discussions might be better archived by themselves rather than mixed in with other bugs/features. If this happens, should they be subpages like MediaWiki feature request and bug report discussion/Message substitution or new pages, like Message substitution? Would it also be best to separate features and bugs? And within those separate fixed bugs and non-fixed bugs? Actually, do fixed bugs need to be archived at all? Sorry for so many questions, but the page is already 4000 words, with another 3000 moved to Message substitution and the first archive so it would be good to have a better plan for this page before it grows too big to deal with. Angela 20:51, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

It'd really be better to report bugs at sourceforge, since the developers receive the reports immediately via e-mail. I'm not sure why this page exists. --Brion VIBBER 00:06, 25 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Discussion. This is especially useful to develop feature requests. --Maveric149
Discussion and sharing information. As Maveric said, this page is especially useful for developing feature requests. Killing this page does not cause more people to submit their feature requests to MediaZilla; it just causes then to discuss them somethere else on wikimeida/wikipedia/wikibooks/wikiquote/wiktionary/etc. Since there's no other central place, they discuss new features anywhere and everywhere. The same discussions happen again and again, and as a result much time is wasted and it's almost impossible to find out what ideas people have had.
This page should not be considered to be in competion with MediaZilla. This page is supposed to be used in synergistic combination with MediaZilla. Idea can be presented here, discussed and polished, and then, when they're mature, submitted as feature requests to MediaZilla. - Pioneer-12

I don't like sorting the features/bugs. It's much easier to spot the latest posts if they're at the bottom. Dori | Talk 13:03, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

As usual, there are both pro's and con's. But since I think the con's outweighs the benefits, I think that a chronologic ordering would be better. hmmm - unless in every header is included the date! Well, that might work - you only have to scan TOC for entries added since last time you took a look.
On the other hand, I think that - in general - it would be nice if the last edits were highlighted in some way - not only here but on all Talk pages and other similar pages were discussions are to take place. \Mikez 13:23, 10 May 2004 (UTC)
It was definitely easier the old way, but grouping related items is also beneficial and it might prevent people reporting the same thing more than once. I'm slightly worried the new way will put people off using the page. It is supposed to be easier to use than SourceForge for people who don't want to use that, so making it more complicated is probably a bad idea. Angela 21:31, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Page too long!

This page is way too long and needs to be broken up into sub-pages. How about we turn "MediaWiki feature request and bug report discussion" into a list of sub-topics? Seabhcan 10:36, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree. This page is the most difficult to navigate I have come accross on en or meta. Thryduulf 10:40, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

How about organising it with sub pages, like en:Wikipedia:Votes for Deletion, and organise it into sections, e.g
  • /article manipulation/foo
  • /recent changes/bar
  • /categories/fish
  • /searching/wibble
  • /user interface/moo
  • /images/kine
  • /interwiki/duck
  • /links/rabbit
  • /unsorted/warewolf
The top level would contain only links to the categories and instructions, and perhaps examples of the sorts of things that should go in each section.
The second level would be a list of requests in that section. along with instructions on how to add one and a description of the sorts of things you would expect in that section (same as on top level). Ideall the link to from this page would be a 1 sentence description of the request.
people could move the requests between sections if they were in the wrong place, leaving a redirect in its place. Similarly for merged requests.
archives would be kept at either /images/archive/kine or /archive/images/kine. Thryduulf 10:54, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I've been trying to get rid of this page for years; we gave up on doing bug reports through the wiki for a reason! --brion 12:08, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Well bugzilla is worse, at least I have an account here It is a whole other learning curve for someone who hasn't done the learning curve here yetTalltim 22:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Clearing out page?

I'm going to try and clear out this page a bit, adding stuff to bugzilla if necessary. It's a massive job, so I'll probably get bored before I finish it, but I'll do what I can. Please feel free to help. --HappyDog 00:19, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:MediaWiki_feature_request_and_bug_report_discussion"
Personal tools