MediaWiki:common.css and the skin/user css files are not OK?

(In reply to comment #1)

MediaWiki:common.css and the skin/user css files are not OK?

No. Why should I send two complete stylesheets to the user when I want completely other design? Worthless and unnecessary mess and load.

Renamed bug summary.

(In reply to comment #1)

MediaWiki:common.css and the skin/user css files are not OK?

No; we separate style sheet files just for this reason: style sheet belonging to an extension should be separate from that for the MediaWiki proper.

(In reply to comment #0)

Add editable stylesheet (MediaWiki:CodeReview.css) instead of linking hardcoded
one like eg. GeSHi does.

I don't think it should be used "instead of" a hardcoded one. The original stylesheet can still be hardcoded, while a custom one in MediaWiki namespace can overwrite its definitions.

Done in r43991

This doesn't seem to do what was requested in the bug -- the OP asked for an on-wiki editable CSS page, like the GeSHI syntax highlighting extension has.

This is providing a LocalSettings.php-level override for the location of the extensions directory where the CSS and JS files are to be loaded... which shouldn't be needed, and if it were it should be a general system for all extensions to be able to use (eg to pull extension styles from a static server, the way we can override the wiki's core style path)

Reverted in r44459.

Finally fixed in gerrit change 76045.