Development guidelines
|
Contents
Coding style
It's important to have tidy, uniform, well-commented code so that it's clear and readable, easy for newcomers to understand and integrate with, and is something all the team are happy being associated with since it's all open source and public. Most programmers have their own style which they are often quite attached to, but when working on a collaborative project they have to put aside these attachments and conform to the style the project uses so that the code style remains uniform across the whole project.
Nearly all of our projects are MediaWiki-based projects, and we like to adhere strictly to the general MediaWiki coding conventions and to the language-specific conventions, the most important for us being the PHP coding conventions and the JavaScript coding conventions. But apart from these conventions we also have a number of important points concerning the general methodology of working on a project.
Independent code
It's a fact of life that coders come and go - usually due to other work commitments rather than being hit by buses. For this reason it's extremely important when working on a project, to ensure that you haven't done anything in a way that requires you to be contactable should it ever break, or changes need to be made to it. All code should be written in a way that makes as few assumptions about the environment as possible, as it may have to run under a variety of different operating systems or domains.
Code should be written in a way that is independent of what else might be running in the environment, which means avoiding the global namespace where possible by encapsulating functionality into classes, and when essential use a name that is based on the extension name such as $wgFooUseAjax for telling extension "Foo" to use its Ajax functionality. In Javascript all functionality should be wrapped within a closure. If you're unfamiliar with closures or still find them a bit of a mystery, please read JavaScript#Closure and some of the further reading it recommends.
Including other code
When including extensions or dependencies we normally use the include directive rather than require, require_once or include_once. The reason for this is that include only raises a warning rather than a fatal error which means that if there are many items that fail to be found the errors will all show at once if using include instead of require. We prefer not to use the _once form because we prefer an error to be raised when functions or classes attempt to be redeclared from a double include so we are aware it's doubled up and can remove the redundant statement.
An exception is that require should be used if more serious problems may be encountered if the item is not found such as uncommitted database writes or other data inconsistencies. This should never be the case with the inclusion of extensions, but might occur in the case of libraries and other dependencies within an extension.
Another exception is that the _once type should be used when more than one extension may possibly include the same class or library, however the dependencies are usually packaged with the extension's code, so it may be best to check if the class already exists first rather than relying on a require_once directive.
The Wikimedia project is now using Phabricator to handle extension and dependency installation, but Organic Design hasn't yet migrated it's workflow and procedures to this methodology. The Wikimedia project has also migrated its bug reporting system from Bugzilla to Phabricator and is in the process of migrating its code-review system from Gerrit and Jenkins to Phabricator as well.
Code-base hacks
Probably the most important point to raise is about code-base hacks. This is where in the process of working on a feature or bug-fix, the developer decides to modify the code in a third-party extension, or in the MediaWiki code-base itself.
This is extremely bad form and should be avoided at all costs! Once a code-base hack has been made, it means that this code is no longer able to be updated without re-implementing the code-base hack again. This means that details about the hack must be added to the upgrade procedure and the hack will need to be tested every time and perhaps modified depending on what changes have been made to the third-party code. In practice such a rigorous procedure is never followed and so either the code breaks on upgrade, or the upgrade of that code is avoided and it no longer benefits from the new features or security updates made by the authors.
When the functionality of third-party code is required, you can usually achieve it using the hooks provided in the code, or if there are none provided for your requirements, you can write another extension that overrides the third-party extension's instances at run-time. This latter approach can require ongoing maintenance, but is a far better approach than the code-base hack. Please add the Voodoo template to the documentation if you've had to override instances at runtime.
Documenting and maintaining procedures
Sometimes the development of certain aspects of the project may require the installation of new components into the operating system, or require configuration changes to existing components. When this is required it is imperative that these changes to the environment be added to the appropriate documentation in the project's wiki. Usually the project will have more than one server which the alterations will need to be replicated on after they've been reviewed and tested. Also the alterations will need to be included when new servers are installed or when reinstalling existing servers during upgrades of operating system or hardware.
Please ensure you follow the existing style when editing documentation including the use if nowiki and tt tags when describing things which need to be entered into the computer or will be displayed on the screen, using italics when specifying path locations or identifiers, and using source code blocks with the appropriate language.
Logging time
Please keep a record of your work sessions and email me when each sessions is complete with start time, end time and a description of the items done during the session. Remember that you don't get paid to watch progress bars! If the tasks you're doing involve a lot of time waiting, for example for things to compile, then either do another part of the job at the same time, or account for the down-time by adding to the logged start time. The same goes for spending time inefficiently if you're doing other things at the same time like watching youtube or working on other jobs, or you're just generally unfocussed, then please try and log an amount of time for the session that reflects how long it should have taken. If you log a lot of time and achieve little, then in the long run you make yourself look bad and are less likely to be asked to work on future projects.
Resources
If you're new to MediaWiki development, here are some useful resource that you should check out to become more familiar:
- MW:Manual:Contents - the MediaWiki technical manual
- MW:Manual:Hooks - all the official hooks in the code-base
- MediaWiki code snippets - our local article with code snippets we use a lot in development
- MW:How to become a MediaWiki hacker - MediaWiki article about getting started in MediaWiki development
- Special:CodeTidy - code tidier that conforms to MediaWiki standards (beta)
