Hi Stephan,

Yes, I know that the the transfer to Git threw off a lot in terms of consistent tagging - that's the main part of the reason why there have been only two Semantic Bundle releases since the changeover happened a year ago.

In any case, anything you can do to improve the state of tagging and compatibility is definitely appreciated!

-Yaron

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Stephan Gambke <s7eph4n@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Yaron,

On 02/25/2013 07:24 PM, Yaron Koren wrote:
> As to creating new Semantic Bundles on the fly that match some criteria
> - i.e., using some set of Git tags - that gets complicated by the fact
> that not all of the extensions have consistent tagging. Some (like, I'm

Yeah, that was one of the requirements to the developers - tag release
versions of their extensions in git.


> afraid to say, Semantic Forms Inputs, don't have any tags) - there are

Ouch, that hurt. :D
That's only because there was no release of SFI since the switch to git.
Have a look at the old SVN repo and you will find tags galore.


> the automatic tags applied for MediaWiki versions, but those are not
> reliable as far as guaranteeing either compatibility or stability of the
> code.

Agreed, they will not help.


> In general, ensuring the compatibility of Semantic Bundle is about the
> level of difficulty one would expect for a package holding 22
> extensions, with varying levels of maintenance for each. Of course, some

Ok, I'd still like to give it a try. If it does not work, we are not
worse off. If it does work, me pestering the devs might actually get
them to tag their extensions consistently and think about and state
compatibility.

Cheers,
Stephan



--
WikiWorks MediaWiki Consulting http://wikiworks.com