Difference between revisions of "Free Software Directory:Backlog active"
(Match sections with project team names + remove redundant section names.) |
(+answer) |
||
| (29 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown) | |||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Append the new bugs you find in the FSD to this page.<br>Remember to '''follow the [[FSD:Participate|participation guide]] and sign your contribution'''. Thank you! | Append the new bugs you find in the FSD to this page.<br>Remember to '''follow the [[FSD:Participate|participation guide]] and sign your contribution'''. Thank you! | ||
| + | |||
| + | The bugs are archived after at least one week from their resolution or if the bug cannot be identified due to lack of information. | ||
<!-- DO NOT EDIT --> | <!-- DO NOT EDIT --> | ||
| Line 99: | Line 101: | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{BacklogIssue|id=453654|text= | + | {{BacklogIssue|id=453654|stalledBy=Internationalization-and-localization|text= |
[[FSD:Features|Proposed features for the FSD]] | [[FSD:Features|Proposed features for the FSD]] | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 121: | Line 123: | ||
Pages incorrectly created with [[Form:Bug_update]] (without the "Review:" namespace prefix) are queryable. If they are then moved to the Review: namespace, then they remain queryable. I'm not sure if a non-admin can edit the page, which could let them create a false entry in the directory. | Pages incorrectly created with [[Form:Bug_update]] (without the "Review:" namespace prefix) are queryable. If they are then moved to the Review: namespace, then they remain queryable. I'm not sure if a non-admin can edit the page, which could let them create a false entry in the directory. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
{{BacklogIssue|id=453224|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=453224|text= | ||
Add "table of contents" header above tabs inside <tt>noscript</tt> tags so that it only displays when javascript is turned off. | Add "table of contents" header above tabs inside <tt>noscript</tt> tags so that it only displays when javascript is turned off. | ||
| Line 136: | Line 136: | ||
"New Packages RSS feed"'s license verification dates are messed up. | "New Packages RSS feed"'s license verification dates are messed up. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | + | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
{{BacklogIssue|id=d34234|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=d34234|text= | ||
Conditional statements should be created for various properties (e.g., "Audio:mp3" should result in "works-with::Audio" being set on a page automatically). | Conditional statements should be created for various properties (e.g., "Audio:mp3" should result in "works-with::Audio" being set on a page automatically). | ||
| Line 219: | Line 217: | ||
It's time to export the old add-on list https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Free_Software_Directory:IceCat_extensions_(proposed)/ from the FSD, then import the new list with 600̈́+ add-ons, then merge the extra field from the backup to it. | It's time to export the old add-on list https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Free_Software_Directory:IceCat_extensions_(proposed)/ from the FSD, then import the new list with 600̈́+ add-ons, then merge the extra field from the backup to it. | ||
| − | + | <div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"> | |
| − | My example (look for differences) when I want to import 600 add-ons: | + | <div>My example (look for differences) when I want to import 600 add-ons:</div> |
| − | <pre> | + | <pre class="mw-collapsible-content"> |
{{Entry | {{Entry | ||
|Name=NoScript | |Name=NoScript | ||
| Line 260: | Line 258: | ||
{{Featured}} | {{Featured}} | ||
</pre> | </pre> | ||
| + | </div> | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 285: | Line 284: | ||
You have to reload the page in the browser to make the tabs visible (including the "Save" tab). Volunteers who doesn't know about will most likely not be able to update existing entries. --[[User:David Hedlund|David Hedlund]] ([[User talk:David Hedlund|talk]]) 08:50, 14 May 2020 (EDT) | You have to reload the page in the browser to make the tabs visible (including the "Save" tab). Volunteers who doesn't know about will most likely not be able to update existing entries. --[[User:David Hedlund|David Hedlund]] ([[User talk:David Hedlund|talk]]) 08:50, 14 May 2020 (EDT) | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | + | : A possible solution could involve defining a checkbox with opacity:0 (display:none doesn't work for this); make the tab title as a label for that checkbox; and style the tab content so that when the checkbox is checked, the contents show and all the rest disappears. --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 21:39, 1 May 2020 (EDT) | |
| − | + | : Please could you extend this issue by adding a link to a video/GIF which shows the steps to reproduce the bug in a popular web browser? --[[User:LorenzoAncora|LorenzoAncora]] ([[User talk:LorenzoAncora|talk]]) 08:29, 5 May 2020 (EDT) | |
| − | |||
| − | |||
{{TopPriorityBacklogIssue|id=display-a-Role-column|text= | {{TopPriorityBacklogIssue|id=display-a-Role-column|text= | ||
| Line 345: | Line 342: | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | {{BacklogIssue|id=it234902|text= | + | {{BacklogIssue|id=it234902|stalledBy=Internationalization-and-localization|text= |
| − | [[Category:Italian_translations]] is not listed at [[Free Software Directory:Backlog Admin Group/Sandbox]] | + | <nowiki>[[Category:Italian_translations]]</nowiki> is not listed at [[Free Software Directory:Backlog Admin Group/Sandbox]] |
}} | }} | ||
| Line 352: | Line 349: | ||
[[Special:PermanentLink/80634]] has my attempt to fix most of these. I was unable to solve the case of [[:Category:Translations]] subcategories not being listed. --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 22:06, 24 April 2020 (EDT) | [[Special:PermanentLink/80634]] has my attempt to fix most of these. I was unable to solve the case of [[:Category:Translations]] subcategories not being listed. --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 22:06, 24 April 2020 (EDT) | ||
}} | }} | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
{{BacklogIssue|id=form-entry-accessibility-BAG|stalledBy=#form-entry-licenses-proposal-BAG, #form-entry-resource-info-proposal-BAG, #form-entry-categories-proposal-BAG|text=[[Form:Entry]] is not accessible specially for devices with small screens or for text browsers, this is related to the use of table-like elements like the ones in "Categories" tab and also some other places where it could make use of list boxes and dropdown menus. --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 21:39, 1 May 2020 (EDT)}} | {{BacklogIssue|id=form-entry-accessibility-BAG|stalledBy=#form-entry-licenses-proposal-BAG, #form-entry-resource-info-proposal-BAG, #form-entry-categories-proposal-BAG|text=[[Form:Entry]] is not accessible specially for devices with small screens or for text browsers, this is related to the use of table-like elements like the ones in "Categories" tab and also some other places where it could make use of list boxes and dropdown menus. --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 21:39, 1 May 2020 (EDT)}} | ||
| Line 396: | Line 386: | ||
Generally, make each category a listbox. This makes the place less crowded. | Generally, make each category a listbox. This makes the place less crowded. | ||
Also, we must avoid name conflicts, like "security" in "Internet-application" and "internet" in "Security". | Also, we must avoid name conflicts, like "security" in "Internet-application" and "internet" in "Security". | ||
| − | The proposed mapping would be like this (as page names): | + | The proposed mapping would be like this (as page names):-excess HTML; +missing signature marks; -wrong page c |
<div style="overflow-y:scroll;height:200px;"> | <div style="overflow-y:scroll;height:200px;"> | ||
* Goal-to-be-used-for | * Goal-to-be-used-for | ||
| Line 613: | Line 603: | ||
We need to enable [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Translate internationalization and localization] in our MediaWiki instance so volunteers easily can add new translated pages. For example [[Collection:IOS]] (4 languages) and [[Collection:Windows]] (3 languages) need the translation links in the sidebar. | We need to enable [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Translate internationalization and localization] in our MediaWiki instance so volunteers easily can add new translated pages. For example [[Collection:IOS]] (4 languages) and [[Collection:Windows]] (3 languages) need the translation links in the sidebar. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | :: This issue is blocking the [[Free_Software_Directory:Translators|translation team]]: without it, it is not possible to plan and assign translations, nor to prepare translators properly. ''This extension should be installed as soon as possible''. --[[User:LorenzoAncora|LorenzoAncora]] ([[User talk:LorenzoAncora|talk]]) 04:17, 17 February 2021 (EST) | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=job-queue|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=job-queue|text= | ||
| Line 641: | Line 632: | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=elic342|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=elic342|text= | ||
Entries with empty Licence fields should not be able to approve. It should only be possible to approve entries with filled License fields. This policy must include the automatic approval when pages are save. | Entries with empty Licence fields should not be able to approve. It should only be possible to approve entries with filled License fields. This policy must include the automatic approval when pages are save. | ||
| − | |||
| − | + | ||
| − | + | Also add “required” text for License. For Create, when a user try to save the page with Homepage not filled out the text '''There were errors with your form input; see below.''' will appear on the Save tab. On the '''General info''' tab the text '''Homepage URL (required) cannot be blank''' text will appear. However, there are no text that says that License fields must be filled if they are not. | |
}} | }} | ||
| + | : For the first case (existing entries with License field blank when edited with form), these entries do still have their old '''property value'''. This is due to the fact that such entries weren't updated after Update-the-license-field was solved. However, when viewing such entries, the information is displayed as expected. With this in mind, one can keep both an editing and a viewing tab open to ease the process of recollecting the old license to match the new one. Finally, provided no other change to page listing on License namespace is made, future revisions of an existing entry and also new entries should display the information fine both on the form and on the view page. --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 17:54, 18 December 2020 (EST) | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=icecatun|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=icecatun|text= | ||
| Line 710: | Line 701: | ||
* Categories... | * Categories... | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | : There is already a page for that, [[Special:Ask]]. Unless you provide more details and examples on how this request could be different from what is already there, I consider this a '''wontfix'''. --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 17:59, 18 December 2020 (EST) | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=wiki special pages|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=wiki special pages|text= | ||
| Line 774: | Line 766: | ||
My name is '''{{#realname:alt}}''' and I am an <nowiki>{{#ifingroup:bureaucrat| [https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Special%3AListUsers&username={{#username:alt}}&group=bureaucrat&limit=1 administrator and bureaucrat] |}} {{#ifingroup:administrator| [https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Special%3AListUsers&username={{#username:alt}}&group=bureaucrat&limit=1 administrator] |}}</nowiki> of the Free Software Directory. | My name is '''{{#realname:alt}}''' and I am an <nowiki>{{#ifingroup:bureaucrat| [https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Special%3AListUsers&username={{#username:alt}}&group=bureaucrat&limit=1 administrator and bureaucrat] |}} {{#ifingroup:administrator| [https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Special%3AListUsers&username={{#username:alt}}&group=bureaucrat&limit=1 administrator] |}}</nowiki> of the Free Software Directory. | ||
| + | |||
| + | There is also https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:RightFunctions. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| Line 827: | Line 821: | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | {{BacklogIssue|id=GNU links License not in SPDX|text= | ||
| + | GNU website links to License namespace pages that are not identified according to SPDX. | ||
| + | I'm not saying that we should fix all of those, since SPDX might not have all licenses. Besides, I already took care to discard public domain. | ||
| + | This is visible at least on https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html, which links to the following pages --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 19:30, 18 December 2020 (EST) | ||
| + | <div style="overflow-y:scroll;height:100px;"> | ||
| + | * [[License:AFLv3]] | ||
| + | * [[License:AGPLv1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Apache1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Apache1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Apache2.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:APSLv1.x]] | ||
| + | :: Tricky, since GNU website mentions it as a umbrella for all 1.x versions. | ||
| + | * [[License:APSLv2.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ArtisticLicense2.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Artistic_v1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:BitTorrentOSL1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Boost1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:BSD_3Clause]] | ||
| + | * [[License:BSD_4Clause]] | ||
| + | * [[License:CC0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:CDDLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:CeCILL-B]] | ||
| + | * [[License:CeCILL-C]] | ||
| + | * [[License:CeCILLv2]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Clarified_Artistic_License_1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ClearBSD]] | ||
| + | * [[License:CNRI]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Common_Public_Attribution_License_Version_1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Commons-Clause]] | ||
| + | * [[License:CPLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:CryptixGL]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ECL2.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ECos2.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ECosPLv1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:EFLv2]] | ||
| + | * [[License:EPLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:EUDataGrid]] | ||
| + | * [[License:EUPLv1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:EUPLv1.2]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Expat]] | ||
| + | :: [[License:X11]] is <code>X11</code>, while Expat is <code>MIT</code>. | ||
| + | * [[License:fdk]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Free-Art-L-v1.3]] | ||
| + | * [[License:FreeType]] | ||
| + | * [[License:GPL-PA]] | ||
| + | * [[License:HESSLA]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Historical_Permission_Notice_and_Disclaimer]] | ||
| + | * [[License:IBMPLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:IllinoisNCSA]] | ||
| + | * [[License:IntelACPI]] | ||
| + | * [[License:IPA_Font_License]] | ||
| + | * [[License:JabberOSLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:JahiaCSL]] | ||
| + | * [[License:LaTeX_ecfonts]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Lha]] | ||
| + | * [[License:LPPLv1.2]] | ||
| + | * [[License:LPPLv1.3a]] | ||
| + | * [[License:LucentPLv1.02]] | ||
| + | * [[License:MPLv1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:MPLv2.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:MsPL]] | ||
| + | * [[License:MsRL]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Ms-SS]] | ||
| + | * [[License:NASA-OSA_v1.3]] | ||
| + | * [[License:NokOSv1.0a]] | ||
| + | * [[License:NOSLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Oculus_VR_Rift_SDK_License]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ODbl]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Old_ksh93]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Old-plan9]] | ||
| + | * [[License:OpenLDAPv2.3]] | ||
| + | * [[License:OpenLDAPv2.7]] | ||
| + | * [[License:OpenPLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:OSLv3.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Phorum2.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:PHPv3.01]] | ||
| + | * [[License:PINE]] | ||
| + | * [[License:PPL]] | ||
| + | * [[License:PPL3a]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Python1.6b1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:QPLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ReciprocalPLv1.3]] | ||
| + | * [[License:RPSLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Scilab-old]] | ||
| + | * [[License:SCOSL-3.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Scratch]] | ||
| + | * [[License:SGIFreeBv2]] | ||
| + | * [[License:SimpleM]] | ||
| + | * [[License:SISSL-1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:SPLv1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Squeak-old]] | ||
| + | * [[License:SSSCFR-1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:StandardMLofNJ]] | ||
| + | * [[License:SunCSLv2.8]] | ||
| + | * [[License:TheUnlicense]] | ||
| + | * [[License:TrueCrypt]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Unicode]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Universal_Permissive_License]] | ||
| + | * [[License:UnivUtahRFPL]] | ||
| + | * [[License:Vim7.2]] | ||
| + | * [[License:W3C_31Dec2002]] | ||
| + | * [[License:WebM]] | ||
| + | * [[License:WTFPL-2]] | ||
| + | * [[License:WxWindows_Library_Licence-3.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:XFree86_1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:YaST-license]] | ||
| + | * [[License:YPLv1.1]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ZELv2.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ZPL-1.0]] | ||
| + | * [[License:ZPL-1.3]] | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| + | }} | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=misc issues|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=misc issues|text= | ||
| Line 861: | Line 967: | ||
* Move [[Free Software Directory:Participate/Project Team]] to [[Free Software Directory:Participate/Groups]]. | * Move [[Free Software Directory:Participate/Project Team]] to [[Free Software Directory:Participate/Groups]]. | ||
}} | }} | ||
| + | : I consider this a '''wontfix''' since moving and making namespaces is expensive, the wiki administrators themselves must deal and better organize the structure they already have in meaningful ways, for example, avoid inserting a collection as a project team, since the goal of the collection page is to point to “curated” list of software for a specific purpose, not to give information of a said group that edits that page. --[[User:Adfeno|Adfeno]] ([[User talk:Adfeno|talk]]) 18:08, 18 December 2020 (EST) | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=W3M and text based browser are hard to use forms|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=W3M and text based browser are hard to use forms|text= | ||
| Line 1,064: | Line 1,171: | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=reventry|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=reventry|text= | ||
| − | + | Revision entry on plain oldiff page displays "$7": | |
The bug can be seen in the revision summary next to the page title. Go to the history of a page, and click on any of the links that are in the dates (example "15:14, 27 January 2018"). | The bug can be seen in the revision summary next to the page title. Go to the history of a page, and click on any of the links that are in the dates (example "15:14, 27 January 2018"). | ||
| Line 1,098: | Line 1,205: | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=JavaScript errors|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=JavaScript errors|text= | ||
| − | + | <code>InvalidAccessError: A parameter or an operation is not supported by the underlying object ext.headertabs.core.js:41</code> | |
| − | + | <code>TypeError: ss.rules is undefined[Learn More] wiki:477:35</code><br> | |
| − | + | ''might be mediawiki issue''<br> | |
| − | ''might be mediawiki issue'' | + | <code>TypeError: pf.select2.base is not a constructor[Learn More] ext.pf.select2.combobox.js:35:23</code><br> |
| − | + | <code>TypeError: pf.select2.base is not a constructor[Learn More] ext.pf.select2.tokens.js:36:21</code><br> | |
| − | + | <code>initFunction is not a function $.fn.PageForms_registerInputInit</code> | |
| − | |||
<pre> | <pre> | ||
jQuery.Deferred exception: initFunction is not a function $.fn.PageForms_registerInputInit/<@https://directory.fsf.org/w/extensions/PageForms/libs/PageForms.js?0b6cb:330:17 | jQuery.Deferred exception: initFunction is not a function $.fn.PageForms_registerInputInit/<@https://directory.fsf.org/w/extensions/PageForms/libs/PageForms.js?0b6cb:330:17 | ||
| Line 1,160: | Line 1,266: | ||
{{BacklogIssue|id=pending entries|text= | {{BacklogIssue|id=pending entries|text= | ||
| − | 6 Dec 2020 [[User:LorenzoAncora]] pointed out an issue that unapproved and pending entries for the FSD could be construed as free software when they may or may not be free. <https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/ | + | On 6 Dec 2020, [[User:LorenzoAncora|Lorenzo]] pointed out an issue that unapproved and pending entries for the FSD could be construed as free software when they may or may not be free. [[Cyberduck_CLI]] was used as the example. After some discussion, key elements of the solution were obvious. |
| + | # Any pending entry is CLEARLY marked (I say absurdly marked), that it is currently under review for inclusion in the FSD and we have not concluded that it is fully free software. If there is a way to change the color of a pending entry, that would be cool. | ||
| + | # Control how and when nonfree entries show up in the FSD search and other web search engines. I think the default is to exclude as much as possible, but there may be unexplored advantages to include them in various search results. One undesired example being that if a user just searches for something, sees the search results include it as being on the free software Directory, they might assume the work is free without visiting the page.<br>One example: https://directory.fsf.org/wiki?title=Cyberduck_CLI&oldid=82006, we could maybe mitigate old unapproved revisions with something like User-agent: * Disallow: /wiki*oldid=*$<br>I do not know of a way to completely automatically add unapproved entries to the robots file (and remove them once approved). There might be a way to completely do this using the API, some programming, and cron jobs. The robots approach also assumes that the scraper is following the restrictions in robots file which we know from logs and sysadmin emergencies is not always the case.<br>We should consider adding `<nowiki>__NOINDEX__</nowiki>` to the unapproved message text.<br>I think I most of these search engine issues moving forward by making a robots.txt file (we did not have one) and taking a snippet from wikipedia and the mediawiki doc. https://directory.fsf.org/robots.txt, https://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt, https://www.mediawiki.org, wiki/Manual:Robots.txt | ||
| + | # Pending entries should have an educational component that allows visitors to learn more about the status of the entry. Talk: pages should work for this. | ||
| + | # Reviewing an entry is optimally done in private, similar to our compliance guidelines. However, for this to be useful, we have to list nonfree programs so staff and volunteers don't repeatedly review the same program over and over again. The presentation of pending entries should not reflect badly on a program, but this may be tricky to do. suggestions? --[[User:Craigt|Craigt]] ([[User talk:Craigt|talk]]) 15:30, 18 December 2020 (EST) | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | :: The bold mark on pages without approved revisions was a direct request by RMS, motivated by practical reasons. I think we can improve its appearance by reducing its size and using gray in place of black, but changing the color scheme of the unapproved revisions might compromise accessibility; the robots.txt solution won't work, because the Robots Exclusion Standard doesn't support regular expressions and globbing: <code><nowiki>__NOINDEX__</nowiki></code> should be the most appropriate solution; software Talk pages are already used to start the revision processes and to add administrative notifications, but I could attach an extra documentation link to unapproved entries, using JavaScript; I think it is sufficient that the warning shown on unapproved pages maintains a ''purely technical'' connotation. --[[User:LorenzoAncora|LorenzoAncora]] ([[User talk:LorenzoAncora|talk]]) | ||
| + | ::: It was recomended by [[User:adfeno|adfeno]] to make use of the [[Template:AttentionBox]] to increase visibility of an entry's status. --[[User:Craigt|Craigt]] ([[User talk:Craigt|talk]]) 13:32, 24 December 2020 (EST) | ||
| + | :::: I don't think this is a good solution, for two reasons: the use of templates does not natively integrate with JavaScript or CSS and therefore would require manual changes to the code of the extension included in the instance, changes that would be difficult to maintain in the long term (also, using XHRs to download the template would degrade the loading performance); a big message saying "Warning!" violates the prerequisite of this Issue (<q>The presentation of pending entries should not reflect badly on a program</q>). I suggest to add a message like <q>This page revision is not approved and may not represent free software. Please browse the <u>latest revision</u>.</q> at the bottom of all old page revisions. I've produced a [https://i.postimg.cc/wMg59TvX/preview.png preview]. My mantra is: let's preserve the existing UX as much as possible, adding changes gradually and unobtrusively. ;-) --[[User:LorenzoAncora|LorenzoAncora]] ([[User talk:LorenzoAncora|talk]]) 07:06, 26 December 2020 (EST) | ||
| + | ::: It was suggested by ggoes, "I think "is free software" would be clearer than "represents free software" Represents makes me think of some kind of spokesman thing. --[[User:Craigt|Craigt]] ([[User talk:Craigt|talk]]) 13:32, 24 December 2020 (EST) | ||
| + | :::: Ok, the message can be edited without any problems, but we must all agree in order to minimize changes over time. The main problem is that ''all'' pages are subject to review and approval, so saying <q>is free software</q> might not be always correct in each context. I think that if the current message is too formal, we can replace ''represents'' with ''contains'' or ''links to'' and its truthfulness wouldn't be reduced. Additionally, we might even think about centring the message on the page if it's not yet prominent enough. I've produced a [https://i.postimg.cc/VkWWHtkY/preview2.png preview] of both changes. 🎅 --[[User:LorenzoAncora|LorenzoAncora]] ([[User talk:LorenzoAncora|talk]]) 07:06, 26 December 2020 (EST) | ||
| + | ::::: What about reversing this statement, using an alternative expression of the same fact? '''"We do not yet know if this page links to proprietary software!"''' I think that is very clear and is explicit in what it is warning of. --[[User:Freefish|Freefish]] ([[User talk:Freefish|talk]]) 13:00, 25th of January 2021 (GMT) | ||
| + | :::::: Hi [[User:Freefish|Freefish]], TY for the suggestion, however I think it's too specific to catch all our use cases (the Directory rejects all non-free software, not only proprietary applications) and it does not represent the same fact (the opposite of free is non-free). If the ''administration'' really feels the need to change the phrase, we could use '''"This page is a submission in progress.\nWe do not yet know if this page exclusively refers or links to free software."'''. Such a comprehensive statement should please and protect everyone. [[User:Craigt|Craig]], do you think this new phrasing is adequate? --[[User:LorenzoAncora|LorenzoAncora]] ([[User talk:LorenzoAncora|talk]]) 06:11, 29 January 2021 (EST) | ||
| + | ::::::: I support the more comprehensive statement. However, I think we can provide even more detail. It should direct readers to the Discussion page for more information and include an explanation as to why we are taking this approach with in-progress entries. [[User:Craigt|Craigt]] ([[User talk:Craigt|talk]]) 13:38, 12 February 2021 (EST) | ||
| + | :::::::: Good. The new message is online since the last meeting and no issue was reported. If there are no complaints, this Issue will be archived during the next meeting. --[[User:LorenzoAncora|LorenzoAncora]] ([[User talk:LorenzoAncora|talk]]) 04:35, 17 February 2021 (EST) | ||
| + | ::::: Regarding the presentation of this message, given that nearly all other visual elements in the Directory are left-aligned, centering the warning will not necessarily make it more prominent. In general, when adding emphasis to an inline element it is usually best to use HTML's <code><nowiki><em></nowiki></code> tag and let the user's browser choose how to display this emphasis. This is because it results in better accessibility and compatibility than with custom styling. --[[User:Freefish|Freefish]] ([[User talk:Freefish|talk]]) 13:00, 25th of January 2021 (GMT) | ||
| + | :::::: <code>EM</code> tags are forbidden/ignored in CSS <code>content</code>; also, inline elements cannot influence the absolute alignment of a widget and there is no actual evidence of an enhancement from an accessibility PoV. --[[User:LorenzoAncora|LorenzoAncora]] ([[User talk:LorenzoAncora|talk]]) 06:11, 29 January 2021 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{BacklogIssue|id=multiple_rejections|text= | ||
| + | [[User:Craigt|Craigt]] mentioned recently on IRC that there were some entries that have been submitted and rejected multiple times, due to there being no record of previously rejected entries. I would suggest adding a new category, 'Rejected entries', that would include proprietary packages. Each page therein would include not a description of the package, but rather a description listing the licensing problem(s) that the package has, as well as whether that list is conclusive or not (so that it can be seen if, after one issue has been fixed, the package is a candidate for re-submission). A message would be added to the new entry form politely asking users to check this category to see if their entry has been rejected in the past. Finally, all pages in this category would be invisible to non-registered users to help avoid any misunderstanding that these packages are free. [[User:Freefish|Freefish]] ([[User talk:Freefish|talk]]) 12:24, 25th of January 2021 (GMT) | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | :: I added a robots file a few weeks ago that should not index revision pages. I second adding `[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Noindex <nowiki>__NOINDEX__</nowiki>]` to the template. [[User:Mmcmahon|Mmcmahon]] ([[User talk:Mmcmahon|talk]]) 11:15, 25 January 2021 (EST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | {{BacklogIssue|id=category_page_broaden_links|text= | ||
| + | I fixed a bug related to a hard coded value on [[Template:Breadcrumbs|the breadcumbs template]], but now there is the remaining issue that pages like [[Category/Business]] link to themselves, rather than to the [[Main Page]]. It might make sense to check where that template is used, and maybe hard-code links to the main page, rather than using a query. If it's used in many places, we could make templates for different cases. [[Template:Subcategory-page|This template]] has similar code, which may be useful when working on the breadcrumbs template page. -- [[User:Sudoman|Sudoman]] ([[User talk:Sudoman|talk]]) 15:16, 10 February 2021 (EST) | ||
| + | }} | ||
| + | ::I changed the template call in category pages to just contain the breadcrumbs for the main page. That seems easiest, and to do what we want. this issue can be closed now. -- [[User:Sudoman|Sudoman]] ([[User talk:Sudoman|talk]]) 15:16, 10 February 2021 (EST) | ||
| − | + | {{BacklogIssue|id=expose the ethical rating of repository references|text= | |
| + | New Feature Proposal | ||
| − | + | The FSF evaluates the ethical attributes of some repository services here: | |
| − | + | https://www.gnu.org/software/repo-criteria-evaluation.html | |
| − | + | The FSF Directory is littered with hyperlinks to MS Github and gitlab.com. Users can conveniently click on those links and effectively be sent by FSF into a walled garden that FSF gives a low rating to. This is the problem: | |
| − | be a | ||
| − | + | * Visitors are sent to Github and gitlab.com using their browser. Those pages force execution of non-free javascript. The common way to access projects with free software is to use git (e.g. "git clone"). On Feb.12, 2021 this was briefly discussed at the Directory meeting in #fsf. It was argued that the links to respositories that push non-free javascript should be inactive links to discourage execution of non-free js whilst making it easier to copy/paste links for use with "git clone", as attempts to copy a hyperlink often inadvertently triggers the link. | |
| − | + | * Visitors and those working on free software projects are not informed as to the ethical aspects of the repository. This is a missed opportunity. It would be useful to take this opportunity to inform the public about the repo evaluation. | |
| − | + | * (perhaps unrelated) gitlab.com currently has an incorrect rating of "C". The evaluation is not about the repo software, but rather the service. While the Gitlab Community Edition is free software, the enterprise edition that the gitlab.com service uses pushes non-free javascript (including but not limited to CloudFlare's hCAPTCHA). The rating links to "gitlab.com", which therefore must be downgraded from "C" to "F". | |
| − | + | Note that none of the above reflects any agreements or decisions. No decisions were made at the meeting on Feb.12, 2021. There was merely attention on the issue. Particulars about how to solve the above mentioned matters probably still need discussion. --[[User:Cypherpunks|Cypherpunks]] ([[User talk:Cypherpunks|talk]]) 15:20, 12 February 2021 (EST) | |
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 05:35, 17 February 2021
⚠ Info
See our infrastructure plan.
Please report confidential or urgent issues to bug-directory@gnu.org.
ⅉ It is a good idea to read the manual of Template:BacklogIssue before editing the page. ⅉ
Append the new bugs you find in the FSD to this page.
Remember to follow the participation guide and sign your contribution. Thank you!
The bugs are archived after at least one week from their resolution or if the bug cannot be identified due to lack of information.
Uncategorized
- 1. Is now solved (sysadmin: please execute
runjobs.phpwhen appropriate to apply the substitutions and allow for further development of this Backlog Task). --LorenzoAncora (talk) 14:07, 4 December 2020 (EST) - 2. Is now solved (see Template:GNU_promotions). --LorenzoAncora (talk) 13:08, 4 December 2020 (EST)
- 3. Stalled by pt. 1.
- Is there a way for us to HTTP ping those without using JavaScript?
I think we'll need to add a dedicated script. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 15:26, 24 April 2020 (EDT)
Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue
- David, clarification is required. Please specify the position of the site dumps. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 13:11, 14 June 2019 (EDT)
Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue
Template:BacklogIssue Template:BacklogIssue
- That will require a free SaaSS (like https://webchat.freenode.net/) but we don't recommend third-party SaaSS in general, however I think this would be ok if the FSF should embed a web-based IRC widget into something like irc://webchat.fsf.org/fsf (for the Directory) and irc://webchat.fsf.org/libreplanet (for Libre Planet). However, the listed web-based IRC clients are not compatible with LibreJS, that must be fixed first. The authors of these programs accept patches, perhaps the FSF can evaluate which client the want to use and patch it? Related: IceCat, Free web-based IRC client replacement for Mibbit needed. --David Hedlund (talk) 02:22, 31 March 2018 (EDT)
- On second thought we should use a dedicated module, so we can enlist the translations on the left user bar. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 15:01, 15 May 2020 (EDT)
- (20:43:02) David_Hedlund: But it's still a unofficial release. I think we should discuss this policy.
Import
Backlog Admin Group
Template:TopPriorityBacklogIssue
Template:TopPriorityBacklogIssue
- A possible solution could involve defining a checkbox with opacity:0 (display:none doesn't work for this); make the tab title as a label for that checkbox; and style the tab content so that when the checkbox is checked, the contents show and all the rest disappears. --Adfeno (talk) 21:39, 1 May 2020 (EDT)
- Please could you extend this issue by adding a link to a video/GIF which shows the steps to reproduce the bug in a popular web browser? --LorenzoAncora (talk) 08:29, 5 May 2020 (EDT)
Template:TopPriorityBacklogIssue
Template:TopPriorityBacklogIssue
- We won't abandon the existing table layout, however there is no reason for not making it adaptive, as HTML tables can be stylized like any other element and are still fully supported.
I believe we should add a CSS fix for small-screen/mobile devices. Feel free to propose (a tested) one during the next FSD meetings. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 08:29, 5 May 2020 (EDT)
- I do not agree with pt. 1 to 4 but I agree with pt. 5 and 6, at the following conditions:
sumshould be replaced withSHA or MD5and "Test Entry" should be smaller and placed in the top-right angle of the form and not keyboard selectable. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 08:29, 5 May 2020 (EDT)
- This does not seem the best solution, how about adding a clarification near the copyright widget? --LorenzoAncora (talk) 08:29, 5 May 2020 (EDT)
- I agree only with pt. 1 and 4. We can do pt. 4 directly during the next meeting, but for pt. 1 we should take into account the DB. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 08:29, 5 May 2020 (EDT)
- This issue was already solved in your absence during the latest FSD meeting (May the 1st) by fixing the existing CSS to guarantee correct alignment and subdivision. For now it would not be wise to change the UX so much, but I suggest to keep your tip here for the future. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 08:29, 5 May 2020 (EDT)
- I fully agree and I believe all should be bounded by well defined rules.
Having such systems and workflows in place is fundamental. If necessary, I am also willing to mentor during meetings. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 14:45, 31 January 2020 (EST)
FSF
Some work, like modifying the source files of MediaWiki, cannot be done by MediaWiki users themselves. We gather such tasks here so the FSF staff can help us fix them.
Template:TopPriorityBacklogIssue
- This issue is blocking the translation team: without it, it is not possible to plan and assign translations, nor to prepare translators properly. This extension should be installed as soon as possible. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 04:17, 17 February 2021 (EST)
- For the first case (existing entries with License field blank when edited with form), these entries do still have their old property value. This is due to the fact that such entries weren't updated after Update-the-license-field was solved. However, when viewing such entries, the information is displayed as expected. With this in mind, one can keep both an editing and a viewing tab open to ease the process of recollecting the old license to match the new one. Finally, provided no other change to page listing on License namespace is made, future revisions of an existing entry and also new entries should display the information fine both on the form and on the view page. --Adfeno (talk) 17:54, 18 December 2020 (EST)
- There is already a page for that, Special:Ask. Unless you provide more details and examples on how this request could be different from what is already there, I consider this a wontfix. --Adfeno (talk) 17:59, 18 December 2020 (EST)
- I cannot use the tool
mw.loader.load('//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Hedonil/XTools/XTools.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript');in my User:David_Hedlund/common.js. - Hotcat is also pretty interesting:
This code is MW version safe. It should run on any MediaWiki installation >= MW 1.15. Note that HotCat is supposed to run with or without jQuery, and also on older installations that do not yet have window.mw.- https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Gadget-HotCat.js
- Suggested solution: I think SMW can evaluate unapproved/uncategorized entries. However, https://directory.fsf.org/wiki/Special:UncategorizedPages (and other #Special pages) are empty. --David Hedlund (talk) 15:39, 16 March 2018 (EDT)
- I consider this a wontfix since moving and making namespaces is expensive, the wiki administrators themselves must deal and better organize the structure they already have in meaningful ways, for example, avoid inserting a collection as a project team, since the goal of the collection page is to point to “curated” list of software for a specific purpose, not to give information of a said group that edits that page. --Adfeno (talk) 18:08, 18 December 2020 (EST)
- The bold mark on pages without approved revisions was a direct request by RMS, motivated by practical reasons. I think we can improve its appearance by reducing its size and using gray in place of black, but changing the color scheme of the unapproved revisions might compromise accessibility; the robots.txt solution won't work, because the Robots Exclusion Standard doesn't support regular expressions and globbing:
__NOINDEX__should be the most appropriate solution; software Talk pages are already used to start the revision processes and to add administrative notifications, but I could attach an extra documentation link to unapproved entries, using JavaScript; I think it is sufficient that the warning shown on unapproved pages maintains a purely technical connotation. --LorenzoAncora (talk)- It was recomended by adfeno to make use of the Template:AttentionBox to increase visibility of an entry's status. --Craigt (talk) 13:32, 24 December 2020 (EST)
- I don't think this is a good solution, for two reasons: the use of templates does not natively integrate with JavaScript or CSS and therefore would require manual changes to the code of the extension included in the instance, changes that would be difficult to maintain in the long term (also, using XHRs to download the template would degrade the loading performance); a big message saying "Warning!" violates the prerequisite of this Issue (
The presentation of pending entries should not reflect badly on a program
). I suggest to add a message likeThis page revision is not approved and may not represent free software. Please browse the latest revision.
at the bottom of all old page revisions. I've produced a preview. My mantra is: let's preserve the existing UX as much as possible, adding changes gradually and unobtrusively. ;-) --LorenzoAncora (talk) 07:06, 26 December 2020 (EST)
- I don't think this is a good solution, for two reasons: the use of templates does not natively integrate with JavaScript or CSS and therefore would require manual changes to the code of the extension included in the instance, changes that would be difficult to maintain in the long term (also, using XHRs to download the template would degrade the loading performance); a big message saying "Warning!" violates the prerequisite of this Issue (
- It was suggested by ggoes, "I think "is free software" would be clearer than "represents free software" Represents makes me think of some kind of spokesman thing. --Craigt (talk) 13:32, 24 December 2020 (EST)
- Ok, the message can be edited without any problems, but we must all agree in order to minimize changes over time. The main problem is that all pages are subject to review and approval, so saying
is free software
might not be always correct in each context. I think that if the current message is too formal, we can replace represents with contains or links to and its truthfulness wouldn't be reduced. Additionally, we might even think about centring the message on the page if it's not yet prominent enough. I've produced a preview of both changes. 🎅 --LorenzoAncora (talk) 07:06, 26 December 2020 (EST)- What about reversing this statement, using an alternative expression of the same fact? "We do not yet know if this page links to proprietary software!" I think that is very clear and is explicit in what it is warning of. --Freefish (talk) 13:00, 25th of January 2021 (GMT)
- Hi Freefish, TY for the suggestion, however I think it's too specific to catch all our use cases (the Directory rejects all non-free software, not only proprietary applications) and it does not represent the same fact (the opposite of free is non-free). If the administration really feels the need to change the phrase, we could use "This page is a submission in progress.\nWe do not yet know if this page exclusively refers or links to free software.". Such a comprehensive statement should please and protect everyone. Craig, do you think this new phrasing is adequate? --LorenzoAncora (talk) 06:11, 29 January 2021 (EST)
- I support the more comprehensive statement. However, I think we can provide even more detail. It should direct readers to the Discussion page for more information and include an explanation as to why we are taking this approach with in-progress entries. Craigt (talk) 13:38, 12 February 2021 (EST)
- Good. The new message is online since the last meeting and no issue was reported. If there are no complaints, this Issue will be archived during the next meeting. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 04:35, 17 February 2021 (EST)
- I support the more comprehensive statement. However, I think we can provide even more detail. It should direct readers to the Discussion page for more information and include an explanation as to why we are taking this approach with in-progress entries. Craigt (talk) 13:38, 12 February 2021 (EST)
- Hi Freefish, TY for the suggestion, however I think it's too specific to catch all our use cases (the Directory rejects all non-free software, not only proprietary applications) and it does not represent the same fact (the opposite of free is non-free). If the administration really feels the need to change the phrase, we could use "This page is a submission in progress.\nWe do not yet know if this page exclusively refers or links to free software.". Such a comprehensive statement should please and protect everyone. Craig, do you think this new phrasing is adequate? --LorenzoAncora (talk) 06:11, 29 January 2021 (EST)
- Regarding the presentation of this message, given that nearly all other visual elements in the Directory are left-aligned, centering the warning will not necessarily make it more prominent. In general, when adding emphasis to an inline element it is usually best to use HTML's
<em>tag and let the user's browser choose how to display this emphasis. This is because it results in better accessibility and compatibility than with custom styling. --Freefish (talk) 13:00, 25th of January 2021 (GMT)EMtags are forbidden/ignored in CSScontent; also, inline elements cannot influence the absolute alignment of a widget and there is no actual evidence of an enhancement from an accessibility PoV. --LorenzoAncora (talk) 06:11, 29 January 2021 (EST)
- What about reversing this statement, using an alternative expression of the same fact? "We do not yet know if this page links to proprietary software!" I think that is very clear and is explicit in what it is warning of. --Freefish (talk) 13:00, 25th of January 2021 (GMT)
- Ok, the message can be edited without any problems, but we must all agree in order to minimize changes over time. The main problem is that all pages are subject to review and approval, so saying
- It was recomended by adfeno to make use of the Template:AttentionBox to increase visibility of an entry's status. --Craigt (talk) 13:32, 24 December 2020 (EST)
- The bold mark on pages without approved revisions was a direct request by RMS, motivated by practical reasons. I think we can improve its appearance by reducing its size and using gray in place of black, but changing the color scheme of the unapproved revisions might compromise accessibility; the robots.txt solution won't work, because the Robots Exclusion Standard doesn't support regular expressions and globbing:
- I added a robots file a few weeks ago that should not index revision pages. I second adding `__NOINDEX__` to the template. Mmcmahon (talk) 11:15, 25 January 2021 (EST)
Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.3 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the page “GNU Free Documentation License”.
The copyright and license notices on this page only apply to the text on this page. Any software or copyright-licenses or other similar notices described in this text has its own copyright notice and license, which can usually be found in the distribution or license text itself.