Jump to content

Topic on Talk:Code stewardship reviews/Feedback solicitation

Is the wiki/Phabricator split useful?

4
Summary by Greg (WMF)

Updated language to point people at the Phabricator task as canonical, but allow people to use talk page if they really wish.

Tgr (WMF) (talkcontribs)

All ongoing reviews include a Phabricator task (e.g. T205482) and a stub wiki page (e.g. Code_stewardship_reviews/Feedback_solicitation/CodeReview) which directs participants to the talk page (but then for obvious reasons most discussion happens on Phabricator anyway). Is this setup useful? It seems to me it mostly just fragments discussion.

Greg (WMF) (talkcontribs)

The original idea was to give people who are not familiar/accustomed to Phabricator but instead more familiar with wiki discussions a place to voice their perspectives. In reality it seems it isn't getting much up-take from that category of people.


Do you think we should have a way to included/welcome non-Phabricator-savy people that might be different? Or just leave this and realize it'll be underused?

Tgr (WMF) (talkcontribs)

I would probably at least replace As per the process, please use the talk page to provide any feedback. with something like Please provide feedback on the Phabricator task. If you are unfamiliar with Phabricator you can also use the talk page. although I don't think Phabricator is really any harder to use than Flow which most people also aren't familiar with (the login screen could use improvements but people still figure it out eventually).

Greg (WMF) (talkcontribs)