Page MenuHomePhabricator

User "Default Skin" preference
Open, LowPublic

Description

Just documenting users' feature request of a 'Site Default' skin preference.

If selected, it would sort of be an opt-in for whatever skin the site admin decides to set for the site, rather than explicitly setting a skin preference. This would also eliminate the issue when users opt out of beta and automatically get their skin defaulted to the site default, irrespective of whether or not this was what they had initially.

See Also:

Details

Reference
bz20553

Event Timeline

bzimport raised the priority of this task from to Low.Nov 21 2014, 10:56 PM
bzimport set Reference to bz20553.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).

AFAIK this is already possible, right, Andrew?

*** Bug 23436 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

This is easy to implement; but much harder to design.

The user needs to:

  • be able to select any skin installed and working
  • be able to come back to the default setting ("skin" setting from "user_options" table should be removed or reset to some value indicating "site default").

My first idea is to have another radio button option saying something like that "I don't care, use the site default".

Currently we indicate default skin by saying "default" next to it's description.

What about link to custom CSS and JS? should there be any? Should they point to the default skin? or the Special:Mypage/common.js / common.css?

My first guess - the answer to all those questions is "no". Just give another radio button option and nothing more.

I think this has been added to MediaWiki. Since a user can choose there own default skin now.

Paladox added a subscriber: Aklapper.

@Aklapper I am not sure if this bug has already been done.

@Paladox this is about allowing users to explicitly pick a skin that happens to be the default (and won't change if the default is changed) or explicitly pick the site default skin (so it will change when the default changes). So it is not done.

Going to unmerge this. The other task could potentially be declined as recently discussed, and I didn't realize when I made the comment in T300919#8276491 what the context of the statement was and what the specific intent was, which does look different enough from this task's intent. I don't think implementing the other task would resolve this one reasonably, based on the acceptance criteria therein.