On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 10:48 +0100, Jej wrote:
It seems that many people need this feature. Since I
published this
patch
(
http://conseil-recherche-innovation.net/index.php/1974/04/11/41-restrict-pa…),
we have 25% of visits on this single article. Generaly people need
restriction feature to manage small wikis, private intranets. I guess
they choose mediawiki for the syntax, templates, and
reliabilty/community support, and not for the ability to manage projects
as big as wikipedia nor encyclopedies.
I've added the link you provided to the following page:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Access_control
...and I propose using the meta page as a hub for activities on this
subject.
From a wikipedia point of view, I think nobody wants
more restriction
features (protect is enough). We cannot polute the core of MW with
features not useful for WP, it's difficult to maintain patches for ages,
and it's not necessary to carry WP specific features in a forked
project. So my choice would be a fifth... E. To write some
specifications from needs, abstract the problem, and start a new project
:) Any ideas ?!...
Actually, that's just proposing a process for determining which of A-D
to select from. Not that I think it's a bad idea to do that, but I
don't think that agreeing to a process absolves anyone from the
responsibility of picking an approach.
Are you volunteering to start the new project? It looks like you've got
a really good start with your patch.
Rob
>Asking again...
>
>If someone were to get gung-ho about implementing access control
>measures in MediaWiki that go way beyond the immediate needs of
>Wikipedia, would you prefer that that person/group:
>
>A. Submit patches for inclusion in mainline MediaWiki
>B. Submit patches to extend the MediaWiki core to allow for a security
>layer
>C. Submit patches to modularize/wrap some MediaWiki components (e.g.
>the parser) in a way that they can be used as libraries for an otherwise
>forked/rewritten wiki product
>D. Fork MediaWiki
>
>Curious Robla
>