Forum:JS review

From the RuneScape Wiki, the wiki for all things RuneScape
Jump to: navigation, search
Forums: Yew Grove > JS review
Archive
This page or section is an archive.
Please do not edit the contents of this page.
This thread was archived on 19 September 2015 by Liquidhelium.

As part of the ongoing review of site JS on Wikia, ContentReview has been developed and enabled here on RuneScape Wiki. I've agreed to it being enabled here with the intention of us being able to shape further development to make sure it suits our needs going forward.

The review process is pretty simple and is detailed on [[Help:JavaScript review process]]. I've had a quick play with it so far, but post here if anyone has any questions :) cqm 18:11, 8 Sep 2015 (UTC) (UTC)

Discussion

okay - svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 19:24, September 8, 2015 (UTC)

K - By the looks of it we're going to need to move a bunch of our JS out of userspace. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 19:32, September 8, 2015 (UTC)

I moved all but Cook Me Plox/calc.js and Stewbasic/calc.js because MediaWiki:Common.js/calc already exists. Also went ahead and put the scripts up for code review. svco4bY.png3Gf5N2F.png 19:57, September 8, 2015 (UTC)

This doesn't change the fact that Wikia is still fucking retarded. MolMan 19:46, September 8, 2015 (UTC)

Comment -

  • "Any clear customization policy or Terms of Use violations will be rejected (e.g. hiding ads, collecting user data, major site layout changes)."
  • "Any obfuscated code will be rejected."

wikia pls :( Matt (t) 22:51, September 8, 2015 (UTC)

seriously though, this only took them, what, 11 years. Matt (t) 22:55, September 8, 2015 (UTC)
Ah yes, I'm glad they finally lost trust in the local admins. We're all too stupid to understand coding languages or whatever they're called. MolMan 23:00, September 8, 2015 (UTC)
I know let's put another login page on every page! That won't lead to a security breach or anything, I'm sure. Quest.png Gaz Lloyd 7:^]Events!99s 23:02, September 8, 2015 (UTC)
Hey, if you could just edit this line below with your password:
hunter2 <-- PASSWORD HERE
MolMan 23:03, September 8, 2015 (UTC)
god damnit, my password is "hunter3" Matt (t) 23:07, September 8, 2015 (UTC)
  • "[Imported] Scripts stored outside Wikia will be approved on a case-by-case basis."
    Like if they're imported directly from github? Irony.
    But seriously, I could say a lot of specific (negative) things about how Wikia is going about this. Instead, I'll only point out one, possibly informative, item. I don't know what technology Wikia is developing to support review of changes to MediaWiki space JS, but it sounds an awful lot like Wikipedia's pending changes feature, wherein edits to contentious articles do not go live immediately, but edits are submitted and then reviewed and accepted or rejected before they go live. The [[mw:Extension:FlaggedRevs|extension]] that implements the Wikipedia feature works on MediaWiki 1.17+. --Saftzie (talk) 07:53, September 10, 2015 (UTC)
They're using ContentReview, a custom extension they've developed in house. there's a link to it at the top of the page. It's not the most intuitive of UIs, but it sort of works for now. cqm 08:08, 10 Sep 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
I'm not going to compare the code, but I suspect similarities. It wouldn't be unlike Wikia to re-invent a poor copy of someone else's wheel, but what I really meant above is that they could have just taken the Wikipedia extension and rewritten some parts of it. Whether they actually did that or not, I don't feel compelled to find out. --Saftzie (talk) 08:32, September 10, 2015 (UTC)
Much like the rest of Wikia's extensions, it has that bodged, had-to-come-up-with-something-quick feel to it. There's no way of telling when a script has been reviewed other than going back to the page which is likely to cause some issues down the line. One potential issue raised elsewhere was how interdependent scripts are being reviewed - what happens if you make changes to 2 scripts that work fine together but when tested against the older accepted version of the dependent script causes errors. I'm not sure who's doing the reviewing at the moment beyond "a couple of staff who know JS" which doesn't fill me with confidence. It wouldn't be so bad it scripts were managed with something like git so multiple files could be altered with each 'edit', but that'd be a bit difficult to hook into MediaWiki. Wikimedia have been grappling with the same issue with global gadgets for years, with no resolution. cqm 08:46, 10 Sep 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
i believe in you wikia
(i don't actually believe in you but still) Matt (t) 07:33, September 11, 2015 (UTC)
I don't doubt that it's possible to implement a git back-end for it, but building the UI on top of that is a radical change from the one edit to one page at a time. Would you build a special page and move the editing of site js files there? Editing large scripts in your browser is a pain, so would you allow users to push changes over ssh or https (I've never used the latter for git so I'm not sure how it differs)? It's a project I'd be very much in support of but I can't see wikia ever implementing it. cqm 08:55, 11 Sep 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
"Editing large scripts in your browser is a pain"
well then we're already screwed Matt (t) 10:09, September 11, 2015 (UTC)

Question - It seems like it would be a bizarre connection, but I'll ask, anyway. Special:Watchlist, Special:RecentChanges, and Special:NewPages are essentially getting "emptied" every day. If you specify you want to see more than a few hours of changes, the pages say there aren't any beyond some recent point. For example other than NewPages linked previously, at this moment, there have apparently been no changes to any MediaWiki articles ever, according to RecentChanges, despite the fact that there was at least one by Wikia staff yesterday, possibly testing this bug. It's not limited to MediaWiki. It's all articles. I just chose that as an example. Is there any connection to the beta? --Saftzie (talk) 16:20, September 10, 2015 (UTC)

Just for keeping earliest records
  • 10 Sep, 11:39am UTC
I think that's a bug I've heard of elsewhere, do you know if it happens on other wikis, e.g. central? cqm 08:56, 11 Sep 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
I suspect it happens on them all to some extent. [[w:c:community:User blog:Rappy 4187/Technical Update: September 7, 2015#comm-909605|Quoting:]]

We identified the source of this - recently we had to make a performance tweak to prevent some queries from timing out, but it went too far and had this unintended effect on very busy communities. We've relaxed the rules, which should mean the histories can get longer again, and we're discussing how to avoid this kind of situation again in the future.

I also suspect the "tweak" involved truncating some database tables, so what's gone is gone. In the meantime, it's probably unrelated to JavaScript reviewing, unless the performance about which they were worrying was the ability to watch everything all the time. --Saftzie (talk) 17:33, September 11, 2015 (UTC)
I'm fairly sure the JS edit as to clean up from his previous edit which was testing the JS review system. Apparently he wanted to make sure it was working as expected in production in case there were any odd bugs that hadn't shown up in the various development environments. cqm 06:47, 12 Sep 2015 (UTC) (UTC)
Sounds fair. FWIW, the "fix" for history bug seems to have extended Watchlists to about 48 hours maximum. --Saftzie (talk) 23:53, September 12, 2015 (UTC)

Closed - Discussion has died. Yay for Javascript. --LiquidTalk 00:43, September 19, 2015 (UTC)