Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Iban]

I was entirely disappointed to see that they were trying to merge the two. It looks like they're trying to reconstruct a puzzle with broken pieces.

[Blacken]

I leave with the final sentiment of 'give it time.' 40d links can and will be fixed to fit the new within-its-own-version template. It's the seventh eighth day of release. Have some patience.

Why is it even being done manually? Why wasn't there a clear migration strategy put in place to make the transition seamless? That's the problem.

[andrewas]

There was. It failed. With hindsight, its easy to point out the flaws. Some articles, like the Industry articles, were left in mainspace and created bridges from 40d space to DF2010 space. Many links were broken since they weren't normalized ahead of time and the bot didn't touch the redirects.
 
Also, the bot should have created stub articles in DF2010 space to match the structure of 40d space. 

Fixing all this has taken over a week.  40d space is almost fixed, there are probably under a dozen real broken links in there. Stubbing out DF2010 space won't take long. Then its down to content creation, with all the 40d content easily accessible in the meantime. The good news is that, next time, we should have none of these problems. The need to separate 40d space from the rest of main space was the cause of the trouble.

[Erk]

Am I the only one that thinks the top problem with the wiki was that the new namespace is "df2010" instead of "df0.31" (or preferably no new namespace for the new material... up to date stuff doesn't need a special namespace)? Why did we stop calling it by the actual version name?

The broken links and the search taking us to dead pages is also a big faux pas. Sorry guys, but though I don't feel so strongly as to attack the migration entirely, as a guy who's managed a few wiki and forum migrations due to version changes in the past, I have to say I can't think of many worse ways to have run this. A copy-over rather than a move to a 40d: namespace, no new namespace at all for the 0.31 stuff, and a {{oldmaterial}} template would have made the transition far smoother... but it's spilled milk.

[Retro]

Am I the only one that thinks the top problem with the wiki was that the new namespace is "df2010" instead of "df0.31" (or preferably no new namespace for the new material... up to date stuff doesn't need a special namespace)? Why did we stop calling it by the actual version name?

There was no version name when everything was set-up. That said, the system in place right now uses [[cv:link]] in redirects (for 'current version')) and {{l|link}} templates for actual links which adds the version code there - so when we have an official version tag from Toady (akin to 40d) Briess can just go 'hey presto' and suddenly everything's "031:Carp" automatically and so on.

[Dakk]

You aren't at blame.

To be honest the way the Wiki was "updated" was terribly executed. They should of kepted everything as it was, and done the information change in stages, maybe leaving a "This is out of date" tag on top, not removing everything even things that weren't even changed.

Yes I am a sour old man.

Pretty much my argument on the wiki. Seriously, keeping different pages for new and old stuff is just doing exactly this, that is, cluttering everything and making the wiki confusing and non-intuitive for new players and people who aren't familiar with 2010 changes.

Whats the problem with keeping a X feature in old versions section on every article instead of creating multiple pages and create numerous redirects, with a disclaimer on top saying Oh hey, this is the new version stuff, the old version stuff is [here], if you're searching for it in normal sized font?

Its not a terrible thing, old version info is important for the community aswell, but why does it have to be done in the most ineffective way?

[Iban]

I've personally held the belief that namespaces are god awful in Wikis. There's a reason why Wikipedia doesn't use them, aside from intranetworking and other very limited exceptions.

[Locriani]

The process by which we arrived at our current solution was an open process, and every editor was invited to join.

I'll just go through a few points here.  These are in no particular order.

• Voluntary labor:  Every editor on the wiki is unpaid, and in preparing for the 31.01 release, I spent, at least 180 hours working out how the changes were going to work -- not to mention the countless hours other people put in to make this happen as well.  I've also spent a significant amount of money out of my own pocket just to keep the wiki up and running.  No, I will not add more ads, and no, I will not be taking donations (donate to ToadyOne instead!)
• Cluttered and Confusing: Several things here.  We boilerplated examples of some articles with "Such and such is old version," and the articles that were short were ok - but the articles that were long became obscene and impossible to navigate.  We have a significant number of very long articles on the wiki.  Additionally, the template {{av}} is supposed to fulfill the purpose of managing easy access to previous article versions.  If you don't think it does a good job, feel free to make a subpage at df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Template:ArticleVersion/Sandbox or something and hack away at it.  Perhaps we can make it a bit more clear and useable. (The ArticleVersion page is semi-protected because changes to it invalidates almost 700mb of cache data - bad if you're making multiple test edits at once - and because breaking the template will break almost 3,500 links throughout the wiki.)
• Why did we stop calling it by the actual version name? We decided that each namespace would document version up until either (1.) major game changes or (2.) Save game incompatibility, when reasonable.  We figure it's a safe assumption that they'll go hand in hand - but that does mean we don't know the final version number of the namespace until after that series of releases is finished. (For example, 40d started as 32a or something like that.)  The next problem is updating links - there are some limitations to what {{l|linkname}} can do; ie, it can not be used as part of a redirect page.  Thus, we have to use the canonical form [[DF2010:Linkname]] in the df2010 namespace.  If we were to change the name for 31.01, and then 31.02 as is now out, or 33f as is possible, EVERY redirect on the wiki to new version information would not work for a number of hours until the bots finish updating all 700+ pages.  Doing this for every release number change would garner more complaints (and more downtime for the wiki, namespace updates are not instant) than I find acceptable.  Once we either (A) have a final version number or (B) ToadyOne approves an 'official' version tag name, then we'll switch the namespace over.  Not before then.
• Why wasn't there a clear migration strategy put in place to make the transition seamless? There was a clear migration strategy; however, the best laid plans often go astray.  We ran into a significant number of issues that we could not have anticipated (including, but not limited to, and exacerbated by, a number of bugs in the MediaWiki software), especially since they popped up under load (Yes, We did experiment with multiple test wiki installations before this migration).
• Why didn't you just archive the wiki database and copy it over to another subdomain (like was done with archive.dwarffortresswiki.net)? Simple answer: Server resources.  Complex answer: One of our goals was to preserve old version data for each major version of the game.  Currently, the database is approximately 1.5gb in size, and the images occupy approximately 2.2gb of space.  Multiply that by 3.  Then, consider that each installation of MediaWiki would require additional server processes to be spawned down the chain, including the cache layers; you have approximately 500mb of memory usage for each low concurrent-user capacity (like, 40-50 req/s) installation.  Also, running all of these on one server is just asking for problems - the kind of problems where websites go down.  Of course, I could cut out the caching layers to save on memory and processor load, but the mediawiki software is notoriously slow, and you'd be waiting about 2-10s for each page request on your separate 40d wiki installation.  Not acceptable.  There were also a significant number of other cross-cutting concerns that made it impractical to 'simply' duplicate the wiki each time a version changed, that I'm just not going to get into here - I don't want to bore people.
• Why doesn't the search default to 40d info pages if the DF2010 ones don't have content? Mostly because the mediawiki software is terribly coded.  I looked at overriding the content search methods to simply link to 40d if the DF2010 namespace only had an {{av}} header, or was blank, or did not exist -- there are over 40 places where I would have to modify code to make that work, and a significant number of these places have different code in MediaWiki 1.16 - which would mean that, instead of keeping the wiki up, I'd be taking it down constantly to fix and debug asinine edge conditions.
• Blah blah blah, why are you defending your stupid namespace setup? I'm not.  At least, it's not my stupid namespace setup; it's the best effort of at least 10 dedicated individuals who spent more time messing with wiki software than playing a game they love.  It's also not perfect, and instead of criticizing it, I invite you to create an account on the wiki (if you don't have one already) and playing around and improving it.  Seriously, the wiki is open for editing, and will stay that way until it stops being a wiki.  In the software world, I tell my employees that if they think something's done badly, they need to create a test case and fix it.  Otherwise, it's just a thought and has no value.  I challenge you to the same thing.  If you think it's done badly on the wiki, fix it! (I've yet to see a way to test a wiki

[Footkerchief]

Why doesn't the search default to 40d info pages if the DF2010 ones don't have content? Mostly because the mediawiki software is terribly coded.  I looked at overriding the content search methods to simply link to 40d if the DF2010 namespace only had an {{av}} header, or was blank, or did not exist -- there are over 40 places where I would have to modify code to make that work, and a significant number of these places have different code in MediaWiki 1.16 - which would mean that, instead of keeping the wiki up, I'd be taking it down constantly to fix and debug asinine edge conditions.

Thanks for looking into it, at least.  Too bad -- if that part worked, I doubt anyone would even care about the transition.

[Locriani]

Indeed. We're actually still looking at alternative solutions for that particular problem - including the possibility of writing a new wiki engine :V

[andrewas]

Stub template which redirects to the 40d page and places the DF2010 page in category:DF2010 articles in need of creation? Not a real fix to the problem, but it would be an improvement.

[Locriani]

We could probably do that.
Also, after a few hours of work, Emi and I revised the {{AV}} template to be a bit more noticeable, visually appealing, and clear as to functionality.  Let us know what you think at http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Template_Talk:ArticleVersion

[Iban]

We could probably do that.
Also, after a few hours of work, Emi and I revised the {{AV}} template to be a bit more noticeable, visually appealing, and clear as to functionality.  Let us know what you think at http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Template_Talk:ArticleVersion

It's beautiful. So beautiful, I decided to try and break apart the source so other people can actually read it. I've left the Media script untouched because MediaWiki was made by satan and whitespace is interpreted literally. I have not added this change myself because I am afraid of breaking it. It works in previews, though.

P.S. There are changes to the text. It explains better what the template does in the Template page and it uses "Please, do not" instead of "DO NOT", which is easier on the eyes and makes the page look less like it's shouting at you.

P.P.S. I'm posting this here because I cant figure out how to put the fucking code in a section without it actually applying the template. I want something like Wikipedia's <source> tags.

Code: [Select]

<!-- DO NOT split this template into two different templates. DO NOT edit this template unless you know very well what you are doing. This template is extremely easy to break. -->
<noinclude>{{shortcut|template:av|template:AV}}</noinclude>
<table style='text-align: center; margin: 0 32%; padding: 0.25em; border: 2px {{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|{{df:current}}=solid #bd8; background: #f5ffee;|Template=solid #9df; background: #eef5ff;|Dwarf Fortress Wiki=solid #9df; background: #eef5ff;|#default=solid #db8; background: #fff5ee;}} width:36%'>
<tr>
<td style="padding: 0.3em 0.3em; width: 100%;">
<div style="margin-bottom:6px;">
<font style="font-size:100%">
<!--- Place new version links here. --->
{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|DF2010|{{avcurrent|v0.31.02|{{NAMESPACE}}}}{{dot}}|{{#ifexist:DF2010:{{PAGENAME}}|{{avcolorlinks|DF2010:{{PAGENAME}}|v0.31.02|{{NAMESPACE}}}}{{dot}}|<font style="font-size:95%">{{avbadlink|DF2010:{{PAGENAME}}|v0.31.02}}</font>{{dot}}}}}}
{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|40d|{{avcurrent|v0.28.181.40d|{{NAMESPACE}}}}{{dot}}|{{#ifexist:40d:{{PAGENAME}}|{{avcolorlinks|40d:{{PAGENAME}}|v0.28.181.40d|{{NAMESPACE}}}}{{dot}}|<font style="font-size:95%">{{avbadlink|40d:{{PAGENAME}}|v0.28.181.40d}}</font>{{dot}}}}}}
{{#ifeq:{{NAMESPACE}}|23a|{{avcurrent|v0.23.130.23a|{{NAMESPACE}}}}|{{#ifexist:23a:{{PAGENAME}}|{{avcolorlinks|23a:{{PAGENAME}}|v0.23.130.23a|{{NAMESPACE}}}}|<font style="font-size:95%">{{avbadlink|23a:{{PAGENAME}}|v0.23.130.23a}}</font>}}}}
</font>
</div>

{{#switch:{{NAMESPACE}}|#default=Please, do not add information about newer game versions here. [[category:Obsolete|{{PAGENAME}}]]|Template=Namespace specific text will be here in the actual articles.|Dwarf Fortress Wiki=This article is in the DF wiki namespace.|{{df:current}}=Please, ''do not'' add old information to this page without first verifying it. [[category:Current|{{PAGENAME}}]]}}

<br>

<div style="float: right; font-size:75%; padding-right:2px; margin-top: -2px; margin-bottom:-7px;">
{{avcolorlinks|Template:ArticleVersion|More Info|{{NAMESPACE}}}}
</div>

{{#ifexist:{{PAGENAME}}||<div style="div style="float: left; font-size:75%; padding-left:2px; margin-top: -2px; margin-bottom:-7px; color:#fbb; width:1px;">[[:Template:ArticleVersion#NoRedirect|<span style="text-decoration:none; color:#fbb;">NR</span>]]</div>[[Category:Missing Redirect]]}}
</td>
</tr>
</table>

<noinclude>
{{docbox|Documentation|template:ArticleVersion/doc}}
{{ArticleVersion/doc}}
{{docbox-foot}}
[[category:Templates]]
</noinclude>

[Locriani]

snip

I'm going to steal that formatting you did and post it to a /source subpage; and yes, mediawiki is evil with literal whitespace interpretation AUGH

[Mason11987]

We could probably do that.
Also, after a few hours of work, Emi and I revised the {{AV}} template to be a bit more noticeable, visually appealing, and clear as to functionality.  Let us know what you think at http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Template_Talk:ArticleVersion

This is a fantastic change.  Well done.