Public SourceMage Discussion List

[flux <flux AT sourcemage.org>]

David Kowis (dkowis AT shlrm.org) wrote [08.03.07 19:25]:
> Hi!
> 
> I've thought a bit on how to "lock down" the moderately important parts 
> of the wiki, and I've come up with the strategery on 
> http://wiki.sourcemage.org/Administrivia
> 
> This is a Request for Comments on that plan.
> We need to decide a few things:
>  * What pages need to be enforced?
>  * Is this overkill?
>  * Is this not enough?
>  * Who administers the groups?
>  * Do we really even care enough?
> 
> Of course, any other ideas will be entertained ;)

I'm curious as to how this is going to work. If there is a separate
group for Lead Developers, and a component is locked for Leads only,
that means that non-Leads (who are still developers for that particular
component) will not be able to edit pages for that component. For
example, if cauldron pages are locked so that Leads are the only ones
who can write, I won't be able to edit the cauldron pages (unless I
mysteriously become a Lead :-P).

I think it would make more sense to have components locked according to
who works on that component, rather than leaving it up to either
everyone can write it (dev and non-dev) or Leads only. Currently,
BearPerson and I both edit the cauldron stuff equally, and I'm pretty
sure he would prefer to keep it that way (so that he does less work),
and I thought the whole point of having the ACLs in the first place was
to ensure some sanity for the "official" pages.

Perhaps just adding one additional group (Developers) would fix this,
since developers will not go around fudging other people's pages
(whereas spammers would be happy to). Otherwise I would suggest having
groups according to components, if we are going to have groups at all.

-- 
Justin "flux" Boffemmyer
Cauldron wizard and general mage
Source Mage GNU/Linux
http://www.sourcemage.org

Attachment: pgpea0i1RQVaw.pgp
Description: PGP signature