AlexRNL

Hi Naked8Snake,

I saw that you changed the WikiData objects several times in December 2018. Right now the WikiData seems not working correctly for several sites like de:Google_Chrome or ru:Google_Chrome. Would please take a look at this and fix this. Thanks! --WikiPimpi (talk) 18:27, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

SPIP wikidata

Salut et merci pour les mises à jour des versions de SPIP. Concernant le champ plateforme P400 je souhaite modifier celui-ci afin d'afficher multiplateforme et non Microsoft Windows + type Unix car SPIP, comme Wordpress, fonctionne sur n'importe quel type de serveur web.

PS : je ne suis pas un spammeur, je fais partie de l'équipe de SPIP :)

--Agouti (talk) 07:13, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Bonjour, effectivement, je suis allé un peu vite, je me suis emmêlé les pinceaux entre les champs OS et Platform (qui correspondent en fr à Système d'exploitation et environnement). J'ai "déplacé" les OS dans la bonne section et remis multi-plateforme dans platform. Est-ce que c'est satisfaisant ? Naked8Snake (talk) 07:46, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Oui ça me semble très bien comme ça, merci ;) --Agouti (talk) 07:58, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

CVS feature branch status

Regarding https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q467252&type=revision&diff=972379823&oldid=972102326

I disagree that feature branch here should be tagged as software beta version.

Beta status is explicit and implies being unstable, not tested and thus not suitable for production use, while a feature branch does not imply any instability and is production ready. Nothing at the source suggests for the latter. The only difference from "stable" branch here is that "feature" branch allows new features.

The very similar case is nginx which has "mainline" (features and bugfixes) and "stable" (bugfixes only) branches, "mainline" being officially recommended for production use over "stable" (see nginx entry talk page).

So IMO feature branch should be qualified as stable version, while the stable branch may be qualified as either stable version or long-term support version. Neither of these is accurate though, as the former does not allow to differentiate branches, and the latter has nothing to do with support duration. Maybe new version type like "bugfix-only version" would be better.

--AMDmi3 (talk) 19:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Hello @AMDmi3:

I mainly used what was entered on the english Wikipedia for filling in the versions of CVS. At the time, it did not bothered me that the feature branch would be tagged as "beta" because that's the information used by the French Wikipedia to fill-in the infobox for the "preview release" field (along with "release-candidate" and "alpha" I think).

Anyway, I hear your arguments and I agree with you on the subject. You can switch the versions back to "stable" (or LTS). Also, I'm not sure if there is some kind of "guide" for filling properly software properties (I do it by replicating what is done on "well-known" entries), do you happen to known if there is such a thing? Naked8Snake (talk) 11:32, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll switch it back to stable. Regarding the guide, I'm not aware of such a thing, been looking at the other entries as an example too. --AMDmi3 (talk) 13:44, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

Destructive behavior

See tP's of SQLite & AMDmi3. Thank you for your attention. Klaas `Z4␟` V:  09:38, 18 September 2019 (UTC)