MediaWiki talk:Gadget-markblocked.js: Difference between revisions

Line 55: Line 55:

== Interface-protected edit request on 27 October 2025 ==

{{edit interface-protected|MediaWiki:Gadget-markblocked.js|answered=no}}

{{edit interface-protected|MediaWiki:Gadget-markblocked.js|answered=}}

Please put the CSS for partial blocks ”’before”’ that of temp/indef blocks. The current order makes it so if a user is both indef-blocked and partial-blocked, the indef CSS (which is more important) is partially overridden, i.e. there’s no strikethrough.

Line 83: Line 83:

::Hmm, looks like I’ve objected to this before, over at [[#Is switching to GitLab / SDZeroBot a good idea?]]. cc {{u|Dragoniez}} as they appear to be one of the supporters of repo-izing this gadget and appear to be an author. –[[User:Novem Linguae|”’Novem Linguae”']] ([[User talk:Novem Linguae|talk]]) 20:10, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

:::The sync config is not currently active. I have removed the warning header. – [[User:SD0001|SD0001]] ([[User talk:SD0001|talk]]) 08:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

::::In that case, {{done}} [[User:Writ Keeper|Writ Keeper]] [[User Talk: Writ Keeper|⚇]][[Special:Contributions/Writ_Keeper|♔]] 12:43, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please sync MediaWiki:Gadget-markblocked.js with User:SDZeroBot/sync/MediaWiki:Gadget-markblocked.js (diff). This brings it in sync with the upstream changes at gitlab:repos/gadgets/markblocked/-/raw/main/markblocked.js (hist).

This edit request is raised automatically based on the configuration at User:SDZeroBot/Gadgets-sync-config.json. Thanks, SDZeroBot (talk) 10:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure who inspired this particular edit, but sending a user to the /raw/ page (now in the text of the gadget) isn’t useful at all for someone who doesn’t know what they’re doing. The user should be directed to the main repo listing. Izno (talk) 21:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit request is raised automatically based on the configuration at User:SDZeroBot/Gadgets-sync-config.json. Thanks, SDZeroBot (talk) 22:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done by User:Izno. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Xaosflux, no, somehow, apparently not. See below. It thinks there is still a delta. Izno (talk) 02:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

cc SD0001. For multiple gadgets, these SDZeroBot edits are starting to hit my watchlist via intadmins granting the requests. Is moving to GitLab and using SDZeroBot to keep things in sync a good idea? I see a couple downsides to this system:

We are adding complexity to low traffic gadgets. There is definitely a tradeoff here. I talk about it a bit in User:Novem Linguae/Essays/Pros and cons of moving a gadget to a repo.
These updates are likely to spam gadget talk pages. Shouldn’t this be an intadmin bot instead of raising edit requests every time?
I am not familiar with GitLab yet. This is yet another technology I am going to have to learn. Sigh.
Wikimedia GitLab does not allow using its built-in issue tracker, instead forcing folks to use Phabricator. This fragments tickets from PRs, which introduces an inefficiency.

I have made 39 edits directly to the source code of the MarkBlocked gadget. One practical result of moving this to GitLab is all of my edits to this gadget are going to stop completely until I figure out the new system. –Novem Linguae (talk) 23:09, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you are asking only about this gadget, this isn’t the best venue for that discussion. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On closer inspection, MediaWiki talk:Gadget-autonum.js, the other gadget I saw on my watchlist, is syncing to mediawiki wiki instead of GitLab. So I guess this gadget is the only one I want to discuss at the moment. –Novem Linguae (talk) 01:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn’t this be an intadmin bot instead of raising edit requests every time? was discussed at some point or another. Users approving changes at gitlab or elsewhere may not be int admins locally (you are).

Probably this bot or another could have a useful extension point where some sort of OAuth support is added so that a change can be supported directly. Izno (talk) 01:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think the decision should be made by the gadget’s contributors which in this case appears to be @Dragoniez and yourself. Dragoniez suggested above they prefer git. I am not familiar with GitLab yet. … One practical result of moving this to GitLab is all of my edits to this gadget are going to stop completely until I figure out the new system. It’s just another git-based tool where the same commands you’re familiar with from github (git commit, git push, etc) will work. We’re not using any gitlab-specific features. Wikimedia GitLab does not allow using its built-in issue tracker, instead forcing folks to use Phabricator. There’s no need to change the issue-tracking venue, which is this talk page. We’re not being being forced to phab if we don’t want to.These updates are likely to spam gadget talk pages. An auxiliary talk page, say MediaWiki talk:Gadget-markblocked.js/sync requests, can be used in the bot config, if we don’t want to spam the main talk page. – SD0001 (talk) 11:03, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I wasn’t quite expecting the warning header to be added. Is it possible for your bot to sync on-wiki changes to GitLab to track changes in a mutual way? When I need to file edit requests I just need to push changes to GitLab, this is a great thing for me, but I’m hesitant to “compel” anyone to use the external site. Dragoniez (talk) 18:29, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

This edit request is raised automatically based on the configuration at User:SDZeroBot/Gadgets-sync-config.json. Thanks, SDZeroBot (talk) 00:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not done @SD0001: the diff above says no change to make, please validate. I disabled this in User:SDZeroBot/Gadgets-sync-config.json for now as well (which seems like it was added by the bot too). — xaosflux ^Talk 09:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding that “by the bot” note, I’m now assuming that is due to userspace json page protections, if possible perhaps putting your username in the edit summary next time would be useful (not saying it is necessary). — xaosflux ^Talk 15:59, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Please put the CSS for partial blocks before that of temp/indef blocks. The current order makes it so if a user is both indef-blocked and partial-blocked, the indef CSS (which is more important) is partially overridden, i.e. there’s no strikethrough.

The code currently reads:

mw.util.addCSS( '\
						.markblocked-loading a.userlink {opacity:' + ( window.mbLoadingOpacity || 0.85 ) + '}\
						a.user-blocked-temp {' + ( window.mbTempStyle || 'opacity: 0.7; text-decoration: line-through' ) + '}\
						a.user-blocked-indef {' + ( window.mbIndefStyle || 'opacity: 0.4; font-style: italic; text-decoration: line-through' ) + '}\
						a.user-blocked-partial {' + ( window.mbPartialStyle || 'text-decoration: underline; text-decoration-style: dotted' ) + '}\
						.user-blocked-tipbox {' + ( window.mbTipBoxStyle || 'font-size:smaller; background:#FFFFF0; border:1px solid #FEA; padding:0 0.3em; color:#AAA' ) + '}\
					' );

I want it to be changed to:

mw.util.addCSS( '\
						.markblocked-loading a.userlink {opacity:' + ( window.mbLoadingOpacity || 0.85 ) + '}\
						a.user-blocked-partial {' + ( window.mbPartialStyle || 'text-decoration: underline; text-decoration-style: dotted' ) + '}\
						a.user-blocked-temp {' + ( window.mbTempStyle || 'opacity: 0.7; text-decoration: line-through' ) + '}\
						a.user-blocked-indef {' + ( window.mbIndefStyle || 'opacity: 0.4; font-style: italic; text-decoration: line-through' ) + '}\
						.user-blocked-tipbox {' + ( window.mbTipBoxStyle || 'font-size:smaller; background:#FFFFF0; border:1px solid #FEA; padding:0 0.3em; color:#AAA' ) + '}\
					' );

—pythoncoder (talk | contribs) 16:41, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As this is a non-critical adjustment, please follow the instructions in the first few lines of the gadget to propose amendments. Izno (talk) 17:22, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure how I feel about repo-izing a gadget that only has 1 file, 0 CI, 0 pull requests, etc. This adds a layer of complexity, bureaucracy, extra steps, and extra approvals that may not be necessary. For example I do not use GitLab so I would be unlikely to create a PR. And I can’t speak for Pythoncoder, but I suspect that talk page edit requests would also be easier for them than GitLab PRs. @SD0001, am I missing something? –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:06, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, looks like I’ve objected to this before, over at #Is switching to GitLab / SDZeroBot a good idea?. cc Dragoniez as they appear to be one of the supporters of repo-izing this gadget and appear to be an author. –Novem Linguae (talk) 20:10, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The sync config is not currently active. I have removed the warning header. – SD0001 (talk) 08:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case,

Done Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 12:43, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Must Read

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Leave a Comment