
derrick.farnell at gmail
May 8, 2008, 12:00 AM
Post #18 of 21
(390 views)
Permalink
|
|
Re: Is there a way to control edit rights for talk pages differently from content pages?
[In reply to]
|
|
Is the conclusion here that it may be better just adding a protection instruction line for each non-talk namespace: $wgNamespaceProtection[NS_MAIN] = array( 'sysop' ); $wgNamespaceProtection[NS_MEDIAWIKI] = array( 'sysop' ); $wgNamespaceProtection[NS_TEMPLATE] = array( 'sysop' ); $wgNamespaceProtection[NS_WIKI_TITLE] = array( 'sysop' ); etc. plus: $wgGroupPermissions['sysop']['sysop'] = true; ? Derrick On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Thomas Dalton <thomas.dalton[at]gmail.com> wrote: > On 07/05/2008, Boris Steipe <boris.steipe[at]utoronto.ca> wrote: > > Guys, > > while this looks elegant on the surface, this is almost a textbook > > example of inadvertent obfuscation. No-one who does not remember the > > connection between talk namespaces and their ID will be able to > > figure out _why_ this loop is being run. Moreover, the code will > > break in case this connection is at some point lost. > > > > If this were in my lab, I would require the permissions to be > > explicitly set. This will go a long way to make the code > > maintainable. Even if the only maintainer is you, yourself, half a > > year from now. Sure, you type more; but code is very much more often > > read than written. And making implicit knowledge explicit, that's > > what software engineering is all about. > > > > $0.02 > > > > > > Boris > > (At the very least add a comment and explanation!) > > Yeah, a comment or two would be good. It's important to note that this > is just a config setting and not part of the core code. The core code > shouldn't generally be modified by end users, and if they do, they > need to know what they're doing. Once you've configured your site, > significant changes aren't particularly likely. A comment just in case > would be good, but there's no need to worry overly much. Doing it this > way would mean that adding new namespaces wouldn't require you to > remember to add new protection, it just requires you to continue to > use the same convention. > > _______________________________________________ > MediaWiki-l mailing list > MediaWiki-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l > _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l[at]lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
|