The upstream support for mediawiki 1.19 was dropped by May 2015.
Sent from iPhone
https://revi.me
GPG KeyID: 0xbeff197a
2014. 11. 14. 05:23 Salvatore Bonaccorso 작성:
> Hi all,
>
>> On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 01:04:35PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
>> Hi Thorsten
>>
>> Op vrijdag 26 september 201
Hi, is there any update on this? 1.19 reached EOL a few months ago (May 2015),
but it is packaged in jessie anyway. Since jessie will be supported for quite a
long time, EOL MediaWiki will be packaged for quite a long time too - unless
someone thinks it's a good idea to upgrade the MediaWiki pac
On Fri, 27 Mar 2015, shirish शिरीष wrote:
> Thorsten who said he's willing to help put up the new release. I could
Indeed, I said that some time ago. But things have happened
in the meantime. To quote what I wrote to the last person
inquiring about this:
| Yes, that may have been because I have
Hi all,
Just read the big thread. As of now there is nothing in experimental
to try new mw versions.
[$] apt-cache policy mediawiki
[21:30:38]
mediawiki:
Installed: (none)
Candidate: 1:1.19.20+dfsg-2.2
Version table:
1:1.19.20+
MediaWiki 1.19's LTS support will end at May 2015, according to the mw.org [1].
[1]: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki_1.19
--
Yongmin Hong [Revi]
[[mw:User:-revi]]
GPG fingerprint: 72595467101410C3DBF2899FCFAB84B9E7BBAB4A
Sent from Android
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-re
Hi all,
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 01:04:35PM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote:
> Hi Thorsten
>
> Op vrijdag 26 september 2014 15:28:55 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
> > Failure to do so will mean shipping Mediawiki 1.19 in
> > jessie, which is currently upstream’s oldstable and
> > fading LTS. Mediawiki 1.2
Hi all,
i have a small personal wiki with MySQL.
I can test the upgrade on my wiki / install a new wiki on a VM and share
feedback.
--
Melhores cumprimentos/Best regards,
Miguel Figueiredo
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe"
> This means that, once I prepare new packages (starting in
> experimental, I think), I will need volunteer testing and feedback,
> from admins as well as actual users. We are on a very tight timeframe,
> and I wish to have this all finished within the next 28 days, starting
> Monday.
I'm willing
Hi Thorsten
Op vrijdag 26 september 2014 15:28:55 schreef Thorsten Glaser:
> Failure to do so will mean shipping Mediawiki 1.19 in
> jessie, which is currently upstream’s oldstable and
> fading LTS. Mediawiki 1.23 is upstream’s current LTS;
> we have an agreement from upstream to support 1.19 for
Hi everyone,
I can possibly work up to about four person-days within the
next four weeks on this, pending an OK from the project lead
of my current for-customer project on Monday. I’ve asked for
this since nobody else is apparently working on it, and we
use Mediawiki in our inhouse FusionForge ins
On Sat, 14 Jun 2014, Fenhl wrote:
> Are there any updates on this since 1.23 is an LTS release now?
Someone has to do the work. In experimental please, *not* in sid.
I could do it, but not right now, and most definitely not this
week either. But I can try to get a block of time allocated for
this
> Upstream said 1.19 would be an LTS release, so we chose
> it for wheezy; I (opinion of other maintainers) do *not*
> plan to upgrade it until some not-too-much time before the
> freeze, in the hopes that upstream will designate another
> LTS version to use for jessie-as-stable by then.
Are there
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 09:05:58PM +0100, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Why is this separated like that? Can MW 1.23 be set up in a way
> that our use case will still work? (If not, we at tarent will have
> to stick with 1.19, Affects fusionforge-plugin-mediawiki too.)
Afaik it's just the WYSIWYG plugi
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
> I'm particularly interested in using this, myself. However, it requires
> nodejs and a running Parsoid server, which means Parsoid needs
*yuk* wtf?! You're kidding, right?
Admins and integrators are *not* gonna love that. (Or backporters.)
WTF *is*
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 12:59:12PM +, David Gerard wrote:
> Next LTS is assumed to be 1.23 (next release version), which should
> also be stable for the Visual Editor.
I'm particularly interested in using this, myself. However, it requires
nodejs and a running Parsoid server, which means Parso
On 12/27/2013 03:31 AM, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> But I wish there were some way we could change this problem
> upstream, i.e. make them see supporting a real DB (someone even
> suggested Horracle!) important.
The problem is "addressed upstream" by having people who are interested
in their DB of ch
On Wed, 25 Dec 2013, David Gerard wrote:
> But MySQL is also the platform MediaWiki is developed against, and
> Postgres isn't, and this last fact is important. This question was
> originally about moving the package to 1.22.0. You do realise that
> MediaWiki 1.22.0 didn't work in Postgres, and no
On 23 December 2013 13:04, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013, David Gerard wrote:
>> (Particularly given Debian's idiosyncratic
>> default to the not-well-supported Postgres rather than the
>> highly-supported MySQL/Maria).
> Actually, Debian defaults to the not-even-a-real-ACID-datab
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013, David Gerard wrote:
> (Particularly given Debian's idiosyncratic
> default to the not-well-supported Postgres rather than the
> highly-supported MySQL/Maria).
Actually, Debian defaults to the not-even-a-real-ACID-database
MySQL instead of a proper database, by ordering of the
On 23 December 2013 12:49, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> What are the chances that there will no new LTS until our next freeze?
Next LTS is assumed to be 1.23 (next release version), which should
also be stable for the Visual Editor.
> In any case, it would still be very helpful to continue packag
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Well, you also ensure that you won't discover issues introduced in new
> versions until well too-late in the developement cycle...
Sure, but that happens always, no matter how you set the
cut-off. Unless we stick with 1.19 for jessie too. I think
you
Hi,
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> > can you share your plans to update the mediawiki package ?
>
> Upstream said 1.19 would be an LTS release, so we chose
> it for wheezy; I (opinion of other maintainers) do *not*
> plan to upgrade it until some not-too-much time before the
> free
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> Hello dear maintainers,
(strictly speaking I’m only co-maintainer of mw-extensions,
but have helped out with mw itself too)
> can you share your plans to update the mediawiki package ?
Upstream said 1.19 would be an LTS release, so we chose
it for w
Hello dear maintainers,
can you share your plans to update the mediawiki package ?
TIA.
--
Raphaël Hertzog ◈ Debian Developer
Discover the Debian Administrator's Handbook:
→ http://debian-handbook.info/get/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject
Package: mediawiki
Version: 1:1.19.8+dfsg-2
Severity: wishlist
Dear Maintainer,
Please consider packaging a later version than 1.19. Many new extentions and
templates utilise Scribunto/Lua which are not supported for version 1.19.
Ideally this could be 1.21, but 1.20 would be an improvement.
t
25 matches
Mail list logo
