From S23Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Detection of extensions

Hi, I am wondering how you detect the extensions used on wikis? Does it happen automatically or does the Wiki has to do something to prepare for detection? Cheers --kgh 08:14, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

We change the Special:Recentchanges URL to Special:Statistics?action=raw and see where it redirects to. RobiH 18:21, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Cool. By doing so you can detect the extensions in use on specific a wiki? I thought that Special:Statistics is only there for statistics. --kgh 18:56, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
I got you wrong. I thought you meant URL extensions, but actually you meant Server extensions. The Server extensions in use on a specific wiki you will find on each Special:Version and scrolling down. RobiH 15:34, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
And I was thinking and thinking how you do this... Actually I know there to find the list of installed extensions of a wiki. Luckily that is not the "problem". I am more interested to find out how you gather this information an add it to a list like, e. g. this one. Is there something a wiki admin has to do, to make it easier for you to detect them? Cheers --kgh 19:16, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Not really. We simply parse Special:Version. RobiH 19:51, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Ah, ok, I just wanted to make sure that extensions get detected without problems. I think it is a matter of appreciation for developers to see that their work is useful and gets accepted and appreciated by the community. Thanks for your help and keep up the good work here, too! Cheers --kgh 22:18, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Marking of versions

Hi, I do not understand the scheme you use presently to mark MediaWiki versions. All versions <= 1.9.x are marked red, the ones >= 1.10.x are marked green. I would propose to use this colour scheme indicate if a version is outdated/superseded or still supported. Thus only the versions 1.16.0 and 1.15.5 should be green and all other versions should be marked red. Perhaps marking the development version 1.17.a in another colour, perhaps orange would be cool too. However I do not know if this easy to implement or not and if something like that is indended. It would definitively help visualising outdated version and advise wiki administrators to update them to a supported version. Cheers --kgh 17:47, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, yes, the intention originally was to mark old or outdated versions, just the versions defined as good were really outdated because they are manually defined and not automatically updated. I changed that to reflect what you said. It now marks only 1.16.0 and 1.15.5 as green and should also make 1.17.a orange. I also tried to enhance the sorting by version, its better than before, looking at the minor version, but it may not be perfect yet. Mutante 06:53, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mutante, that's awesome. I just had a look at it and it is really good! 1.17.a is not orange but red which is ok too since it should not be used in a productive environment. Updating seems to be a real problem for a lot of admins since mostly outdated versions are being used. Hopefully this "red alert" triggers something since MediaWiki deserves better. Thanks again and cheers --kgh 22:20, 29 August 2010 (UTC) PS I think sorting has not improved. My impression is that it was better before, but I might be wrong.