Esolang talk:Community portal

From Esolang
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Archives:

Shall we clarify how often we archive this talk page?

IMO I think we should archive when the number of topics reaches to 20. Any other ideas? Also when we got a conclusion, we should put the policy on the top of this page. --YamTokTpaFa (talk) 02:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Categorization policy?

Have you ever cared it? Seeing Special:UncategorizedPages, there are exactly 715 uncategorized pages at this point. For example, some pages are categorized into Category:Joke languages but not to Category:Languages. Seeing Esolang:Categorization#Languages,

Category:Languages (this should be present in all languages, as opposed to e.g. Category:Computational models)

and isn't the case above against this policy?

Also some pages are categorized to no categories yet. Therefore we should clarify categorization policy more, e.g. categorize on at least a category, as an example. --YamTokTpaFa (talk) 02:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Template usages

There are many templates with no usage descriptions. We should add some. --YamTokTpaFa (talk) 02:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

Usage of this talk page

Shall we clarify it? --YamTokTpaFa (talk)

Existence of Special:WithoutInterwiki

Why do we still have this although we have no other language versions yet? --YamTokTpaFa (talk) 02:27, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

(idea)Introducing SyntaxHighlight?

Though this is nothing but an idea, but shall we introduce SyntaxHighlight extension? Also is it possible to add available languages by ourselves? --YamTokTpaFa (talk) 02:48, 12 May 2019 (UTC)

I'm in favour, but another perspective is that it privileges 'proper' languages. Code in Python and COBOL will look colourful, but our own brainfuck, binary combinatory logic and deadfish would not. IFcoltransG (talk) 08:38, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Admin list?

Is there any definite list of people with special permissions? --Emerald (talk) 12:42, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Special:ListAdmins gives a list of administrators. Changing the Group lets you view other lists of people, such as bots and bureaucrats. —User:PythonshellDebugwindow (talk) ~~~~ 13:22, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Freenode and the future

As you may have heard, there's been happenings™ over at Freenode organizationally. I'm not qualified to explain, but you can look at some of the ex-staffer resignation letters (mniip, kline, Fuchs, many more) for at least one perspective. What it boils down to is, we might find it proper to migrate the "official" (FSVO) IRC presence somewhere else; as of this writing, based on a handful of channels I hang out on, the new libera.chat platform looks like the majority choice.

Assuming things don't settle down, here's a provisional proposal:

  • Set up shop on ##esoteric at libera. Since topic channels are first-come-first-served, I've gone ahead and registered it, out of an abundance of caution.
  • Before moving "services" (bots and so on), wait a couple of days to see where the freenode user community in general decides to go.
  • Potentially: Consider doing a "registered community" for the #esolangs (and #esolangs-*) channel namespaces. I'm of two minds about this: the kind of ad-hoc, informal community we have here, and the (low) amount of activity there is on IRC, doesn't necessarily warrant it. On the other hand, since they've bothered to set up this route for communities with no official claim to name, we might as well avail of the opportunity.

Please feel free to discuss. If there's support for the community registration, I would be using this thread as "evidence", since it's not like we as a community have anything like a governing structure or whatnot. Also, *if* we go that way, I think I'd prefer to wait a bit first, since I imagine the people involved in reviewing that kind of applications will be quite busy with more respectable communities.

--fizzie (talk) 13:27, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

I think we definitely have a good claim to a registered community. Personally, I feel that that's the right thing to do, too, for peace-of-mind if nothing else. --Taneb (talk) 16:08, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
I say if you want to leave Freenode, we should go to OFTC, they've been running an IRC network with culture similar to Freenode, I've known them for almost a decade, several open source software projects has a community there. Irc hostname is irc.oftc.net . – b_jonas 23:02, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
As we're not specifically about free and open source software, I think we're likely off-topic on OFTC according to their network policy, so we'd need to set the channel mode to +s and it would be harder for us to get help from network staff in the case of spammers or whatever. --Taneb (talk) 15:38, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
Regarding the two "obvious" networks, I don't have an unambiguous opinion. In very practical terms, I don't think the OFTC policy is likely to cause any issues, and I doubt being +s (if required) would really make much of a difference. On the other hand, it might still be nice to be an officially designated community; Libera is feeling like a closer "spiritual successor" of the freenode project; and the number of people betting on it (e.g., Wikimedia, possibly Ubuntu) makes me think it's likely to survive. On the third (gripping?) hand, it is undeniably very new, and OFTC's governance structure is a lot more transparent (which I like) than an unspecified "Swedish non-profit" (but they literally just launched, so). On balance, I'm probably still leaning towards the new thing. Not sure if strongly enough to look into doing some groundwork about it. --fizzie (talk) 21:49, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
On the topic of community registration, I had a discussion with a staffer (rationale: even if the new network doesn't pan out, a registration there won't hurt anyone), and they were positive about us claiming the #esolangs channel (and the about/esolangs/... cloak namespace, which I — can't lie — sounds pretty nice), but also keeping #esoteric set up as a forwarder for "quite some time", which I expect to mean "until a group of people come around with a plausible claim why they're more closely associated with the word". I mailed out the e-paperwork for that. --fizzie (talk) 12:33, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Given the widely publicized (1, 2, 3, 4) freenode move to take over any #foo (primary channel) that dared to mention the alternative in its topic, by force-forwarding them to ##foo (topic channel) and clearing all registration details, I think we might as well just make this official. While we've never had any valid claim on the name #esoteric (other than by adverse possession), it feels like renaming to ##esoteric to stay there at this point would be a bit pointless. In practice all the activity seems to have already moved to #esolangs on Libera.Chat, and some of it has even been (gasp) on-topic. Unless anyone objects by EOW (or unilaterally does it before that), I'll update the community portal page to reflect that. (At the moment we've bridged the networks with a bot, as one does; will have to see how long it makes sense to keep that up.) --fizzie (talk) 11:54, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

LifeWiki links

The link to LifeWiki doesn't seem to be dead. Why is it marked "it may be dead"? -- New Army (talk) 03:54, 20 May 2021 (UTC)

IIRC LifeWiki didn't show any actual posts without being logged in for some time. But the link works now, great! --Int-e (talk) 08:45, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
On my computer it sometimes give 403 errors and sometimes the page is simply blank. ColorfulGalaxy (talk) 09:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
403 means forbidden. But that is your own forum page. It must be your computer's problem. --New Army (talk) 03:26, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
After my LifeWiki forum account got hacked, they deleted all my posts except for one I didn't actually post. I had to create a new account on the LifeWiki forums. ColorfulGalaxy (disambiguation) (talk) 09:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Libera.Chat community and cloaks

We have just finished with the community registration for #esolangs over on Libera.Chat:

-ChanServ(ChanServ@services.libera.chat)- The #esolangs namespace is registered to the esolangs project
-ChanServ(ChanServ@services.libera.chat)- Public contacts: int-e, fizzie

Along with the community comes the about/esolangs/* cloak namespace. Most (admittedly generally more "serious") projects/communities have some sort of a policy (e.g., Ubuntu, Fedora, Wikimedia) on how to manage their namespace. What should ours be?

Here's are some potential thoughts — please discuss below:

  • Allow anyone registered on the wiki to request a cloak that's either about/esolangs/<IRC nickname> or about/esolangs/<wiki username>. Should there be any edit requirements, Wikimedia style? Possibly not; or if so, something very modest — something like, at least one nontrivial and on-topic contribution into the main namespace.
  • AIUI, cloak registration works by having one of our community contacts (at the moment: fizzie or int-e) talk to a Libera.Chat staffer and ask them to set the cloaks. To avoid causing any extra toil to people who're undoubtedly quite busy, especially now, I'd suggest collecting at least the initial chunk of interested people into a batch, rather than having one of us ask about them one by one.
  • Keep track of registration requests over the wiki somehow? Maybe just set up a (hypothetical) Esolang:IRC cloaks page, sorted into "pending", "requested" and "active" lists.
  • Dedicate about/esolangs/bot/* to IRC bots. It's not as short as some of our bots might like, but it's not too terrible in the grand scheme of thing.

--fizzie (talk) 09:47, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I think using the wiki username is better (since if the cloak is used at all it is linked with clearly the IRC with esolangs wiki, and the IRC name is already present in the IRC anyways) (although there is the consideration, what if the wiki username is not a valid cloak?), and perhaps at least one edit should be required (but doesn't matter what it is, whether or not it is nontrivial, what namespace, etc; it just has to use the wiki account; I suppose an edit to the request page would satisfy this criteria). Perhaps another question is, is some kind of verification required? --Zzo38 (talk) 21:24, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Add gemini:// to the recognised URI schemes

Hello, I made myself a user page, and tried to make a link to my Gemini “capsule” (as they are customarily called, basically just means “website”), and a web search and a couple of MediaWiki help pages later, I found $wgUrlProtocols.

For those unfamiliar with Gemini, you can find it’s website at https://gemini.circumlunar.space/. It’s a protocol and accompanying markup format for simpler websites than the usual HTML+CSS+JS+HTTP(S)+whatever blob; but more capable than a similar protocol, Gopher (which is in that variable by default).

It seems that MediaWiki doesn’t yet include gemini:// in this variable, which means one can’t link to resources served via Gemini, which is a shame. I, for one, would greatly appreciate if this was done, so that I could have a link directly to it; and if any resources for any esolangs are served via Gemini, it would be possible to link to them.

--OrichalcumCosmonaut (talk) (it/its or they/them please) 09:49, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Sure, makes sense. Added it to the configuration; seems to work on your user page. --fizzie (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! --OrichalcumCosmonaut (talk) (it/its or they/them please) 10:45, 14 July 2021 (UTC)