Forum:AWB alternatives?

I am looking at making some custom code for our wikia so that we have a tool that helps raise the quality of our site without requiring a C.S. degree to run. I thought pywikipedia was pretty easy, and I left instructions how to do maintenance runs using it, but no one much used that while I was on extended wikia break. I am thinking AWB will be more accessible to our experienced contributors. I poked around the code and adding plugins or messing with the exe would be easy enough, but I would prefer something that worked with foxfire or some more open standard than the MS platform. I know this thing will work in a compatibility box on Mac, but I would hate for the development environment to go obsolete again the next time the wind blows. Is there anything I should be aware of regarding assisted editing tools, before I make the jump and go with AWB? - ~  Ph l o x  02:55, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I searched a long time for alternatives, but it doesn't seems there's any.
 * Maybe some of us could make one.
 * But my programming language is mainly Visual Basic .Net under SharpDevelop; the free and opensource IDE. Things can be compiled for the Mono Framework wich i know mean that the app will be able to run on Linux, but i'm not sure about OSX.
 * And it's not something we could get done fast. We would need to learn the mediawiki api (and me would have to learn a lot more than this but maybe i wouldn't have to care for part that other are doing, except for testing them).
 * But, the major problem might be to make an app that only sysop (and bot) account are able to use. Maybe like AutowikiBrowser, the bot should check for the central wikia authorization page.
 * Because, you know, making an easy to use software that anyone could use could be pretty harmfull.
 * I think this tell why PyWikipediaBot and AutowikiBrowser aren't easy to use. — TulipVorlax 09:44, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
 * It is true that open source means that the AWB whitelist check could be defeated. I don't know if Andre put one into pywikipedia, but in any case most civilians don't know how to figure this out, so you basically deal with the misuse.  Anyone who does uses it for large scale controversial edits or as a bullying toy gets removed from the whitelist.  IMHO the net is that these assisted edit tools are good for overwhelmed regular contributors who want to add polish to their sites.  There is a windowing interface for python so I guess maybe a py thing could be built, but heck- I have 4 kids and two more on the way so I don't have a heckuva lot of time to build something a little bit more solidly in the open standards community.  - ~  Ph l o x   20:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * But AutoWikiBrowser is already fully OpenSource (GPL). Or did i missed something ?
 * And it's sad that it's only in english. Lol. — TulipVorlax 02:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure the source is open, but its built on .NET. Not that C# and all that stuff is bad- actually it and the com object model is a much more technically advanced approach.  But like MacApp and MFC, you ride the back of a tiger when you establish a dependency on an entity whose commercial interests are divergent from those of the open standards community.  I was writing MacApp code until it became clear that Apple's might yank it.  What if AWB were written in macapp or microsoft foundation classes?  Sure those platforms still exist, but the transitions have been bumpy, (eg perfectly reasonable mfc apps broke badly with the transitions to .Net).  Sure these things are fixable but talk to any mac developer who has the scars to show their experience in constantly porting their software depending on which way the wind is blowing at apple.  Who needs the aggravation.  Better to have an application framework that is truly independent of the commercial interests of the big boys.  Independent UIs exist, eg for python, but the UIs are not especially awe inspiring.  Anyway, like I said I am going to be lazy on this decision because I don't have the kind of personal time bandwidth to do the hardcore development required.  If I did, I would probably build on what wikipedian, engles, herding and the other contributors have been doing with pywikipedia. - ~  Ph l o x   18:34, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * For me the most annoying part is that one must be multiplataform to use the limited bot programs available unless one masters pywikipedia