Hi,
if somebody wonders why do we have those french guys registering on the wiki:
http://blog.mageekbox.net/?post/2011/07/10/La-r%C3%A9volution-est-en-marche-%21
the author thought that anybody can vote who has wiki account, but
that is corrected now.
however judging from the responses and the number of registrations I
think we should publish something to the php.net frontpage about the
accepted voting RFC, and maybe rephrase or clean up the who can vote
part.
for example can someone with svn account and 1 commit vote?
even if it's a sole test or one-liner doc fix?
even if it was 10 years ago?
how will the selection of the representatives work?
do we have some limitations for the representatives? (for example
there can be only N number of reps any given time, etc.)
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
Hi!
Hi,
if somebody wonders why do we have those french guys registering on the wiki:
http://blog.mageekbox.net/?post/2011/07/10/La-r%C3%A9volution-est-en-marche-%21the author thought that anybody can vote who has wiki account, but
that is corrected now.
however judging from the responses and the number of registrations I
think we should publish something to the php.net frontpage about the
accepted voting RFC, and maybe rephrase or clean up the who can vote
part.for example can someone with svn account and 1 commit vote?
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but
then again, not sure about how to formalize that. Note that vote isn't
meant to be the decision. At least I think it wasn't and shouldn't mean
that. It should be a measure of if there's a consensus about certain
thing or not.
As for technical side, I don't know enough about how the auth system
works to see if we can enforce it technically. If somebody with this
knowledge is willing to help, please ping me and we can discuss how to
implement this in docuwiki.
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227
hi,
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but then
again,
Everyone with @php.net is what was decided.
not sure about how to formalize that. Note that vote isn't meant to
be the decision. At least I think it wasn't and shouldn't mean that. It
should be a measure of if there's a consensus about certain thing or not.
Indeed it is a decision. Except for things which can be vetoed due to
BC breaks or similar reasons.
As for technical side, I don't know enough about how the auth system works
to see if we can enforce it technically. If somebody with this
knowledge is willing to help, please ping me and we can discuss how to
implement this in docuwiki.
I will check that this week, or if anyone else has more free time, pls go ahead.
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but then
again,Everyone with @php.net is what was decided.
Was it? The RFC wasn't exactly clear on that one: the wording was
"People with php.net SVN accounts that have contributed code to PHP",
which I took to mean people with php-src karma, to be honest.
Adam
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but then
again,Everyone with @php.net is what was decided.
Was it? The RFC wasn't exactly clear on that one: the wording was
"People with php.net SVN accounts that have contributed code to PHP",
which I took to mean people with php-src karma, to be honest.
XML is code, so doc is code. PEAR is made of code too. PECL is as well.
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
Hi!
Hi,
if somebody wonders why do we have those french guys registering on the
wiki:http://blog.mageekbox.net/?post/2011/07/10/La-r%C3%A9volution-est-en-marche-%21
the author thought that anybody can vote who has wiki account, but
that is corrected now.
however judging from the responses and the number of registrations I
think we should publish something to the php.net frontpage about the
accepted voting RFC, and maybe rephrase or clean up the who can vote
part.for example can someone with svn account and 1 commit vote?
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but then
again, not sure about how to formalize that. Note that vote isn't meant to
be the decision. At least I think it wasn't and shouldn't mean that. It
should be a measure of if there's a consensus about certain thing or not.As for technical side, I don't know enough about how the auth system works
to see if we can enforce it technically. If somebody with this
knowledge is willing to help, please ping me and we can discuss how to
implement this in docuwiki.
I thought I had pointed this out already.
AFAICT anyone with wiki account can vote. And anyone can get wiki account.
People with wiki accounts however cannot modify any content because we
have write restrictions on everything, so before this vote plugin came
along a wiki account was utterly useless without an admin explicitly
giving write karma.
-Hannes
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
Hi!
Hi,
if somebody wonders why do we have those french guys registering on the
wiki:http://blog.mageekbox.net/?post/2011/07/10/La-r%C3%A9volution-est-en-marche-%21
the author thought that anybody can vote who has wiki account, but
that is corrected now.
however judging from the responses and the number of registrations I
think we should publish something to the php.net frontpage about the
accepted voting RFC, and maybe rephrase or clean up the who can vote
part.for example can someone with svn account and 1 commit vote?
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but then
again, not sure about how to formalize that. Note that vote isn't meant to
be the decision. At least I think it wasn't and shouldn't mean that. It
should be a measure of if there's a consensus about certain thing or not.As for technical side, I don't know enough about how the auth system works
to see if we can enforce it technically. If somebody with this
knowledge is willing to help, please ping me and we can discuss how to
implement this in docuwiki.I thought I had pointed this out already.
AFAICT anyone with wiki account can vote. And anyone can get wiki account.
People with wiki accounts however cannot modify any content because we
have write restrictions on everything, so before this vote plugin came
along a wiki account was utterly useless without an admin explicitly
giving write karma.
Yes, hence why I said we have to fix that in the moodle plugin. But
who can vote is clearly define. Now, I'd to ask wiki admins to do not
accept random accounts for the fun to accept them. Thanks.
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
about the fix, instead of "only registered users", we have to add
group support, so we can add php-src/doc/etc. to it and manually add
external and approved persons. If anyone has time to do it, please go
ahead, code is in SVN.
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:Hi!
Hi,
if somebody wonders why do we have those french guys registering on the
wiki:http://blog.mageekbox.net/?post/2011/07/10/La-r%C3%A9volution-est-en-marche-%21
the author thought that anybody can vote who has wiki account, but
that is corrected now.
however judging from the responses and the number of registrations I
think we should publish something to the php.net frontpage about the
accepted voting RFC, and maybe rephrase or clean up the who can vote
part.for example can someone with svn account and 1 commit vote?
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but then
again, not sure about how to formalize that. Note that vote isn't meant to
be the decision. At least I think it wasn't and shouldn't mean that. It
should be a measure of if there's a consensus about certain thing or not.As for technical side, I don't know enough about how the auth system works
to see if we can enforce it technically. If somebody with this
knowledge is willing to help, please ping me and we can discuss how to
implement this in docuwiki.I thought I had pointed this out already.
AFAICT anyone with wiki account can vote. And anyone can get wiki account.
People with wiki accounts however cannot modify any content because we
have write restrictions on everything, so before this vote plugin came
along a wiki account was utterly useless without an admin explicitly
giving write karma.Yes, hence why I said we have to fix that in the moodle plugin. But
who can vote is clearly define. Now, I'd to ask wiki admins to do not
accept random accounts for the fun to accept them. Thanks.Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.
We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.
Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.
I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?
-Hannes
about the fix, instead of "only registered users", we have to add
group support, so we can add php-src/doc/etc. to it and manually add
external and approved persons. If anyone has time to do it, please go
ahead, code is in SVN.On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:Hi!
Hi,
if somebody wonders why do we have those french guys registering on the
wiki:http://blog.mageekbox.net/?post/2011/07/10/La-r%C3%A9volution-est-en-marche-%21
the author thought that anybody can vote who has wiki account, but
that is corrected now.
however judging from the responses and the number of registrations I
think we should publish something to the php.net frontpage about the
accepted voting RFC, and maybe rephrase or clean up the who can vote
part.for example can someone with svn account and 1 commit vote?
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but then
again, not sure about how to formalize that. Note that vote isn't meant to
be the decision. At least I think it wasn't and shouldn't mean that. It
should be a measure of if there's a consensus about certain thing or not.As for technical side, I don't know enough about how the auth system works
to see if we can enforce it technically. If somebody with this
knowledge is willing to help, please ping me and we can discuss how to
implement this in docuwiki.I thought I had pointed this out already.
AFAICT anyone with wiki account can vote. And anyone can get wiki account.
People with wiki accounts however cannot modify any content because we
have write restrictions on everything, so before this vote plugin came
along a wiki account was utterly useless without an admin explicitly
giving write karma.Yes, hence why I said we have to fix that in the moodle plugin. But
who can vote is clearly define. Now, I'd to ask wiki admins to do not
accept random accounts for the fun to accept them. Thanks.Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
--
Pierre@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?-Hannes
Imo the best would be to have the voting under a different namespace,
and create a group for that.
the @php.net users would be by default in it, and we can add others manually.
I think that the voting plugin either supports checking the
restrictions or would be easy to extend it to support that.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
hi,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.
It is somehow easier in the wiki, we have groups afair. Also for the
votes, only svn account is enough, and "vote" group for external
people.
We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?
It only checks for registered users. We have to change this check to
registered+given group(s).
Cheers,
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?
Answering my own question; No, it doesn't.
http://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:doodle2#authentication
-Hannes
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?Answering my own question; No, it doesn't.
http://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:doodle2#authentication-Hannes
I checked the source, if the permissions are set correctly, then the
required code change is minimal:
in the php-wiki/dokuwiki/lib/plugins/doodle/syntax.php file we have to
modify the render and castVote methods to check
$this->isAllowedToEditEntry($fullname) and thats it.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?Answering my own question; No, it doesn't.
http://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:doodle2#authentication-Hannes
I checked the source, if the permissions are set correctly, then the
required code change is minimal:
in the php-wiki/dokuwiki/lib/plugins/doodle/syntax.php file we have to
modify the render and castVote methods to check
$this->isAllowedToEditEntry($fullname) and thats it.--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
of course the explicit group checking would be better, because
currently we have votes under rfc namespace where some users have
write access as they proposed/wanted to propose some rfc but they
shouldn't .
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?Answering my own question; No, it doesn't.
http://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:doodle2#authentication-Hannes
I checked the source, if the permissions are set correctly, then the
required code change is minimal:
in the php-wiki/dokuwiki/lib/plugins/doodle/syntax.php file we have to
modify the render and castVote methods to check
$this->isAllowedToEditEntry($fullname) and thats it.--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.huof course the explicit group checking would be better, because
currently we have votes under rfc namespace where some users have
write access as they proposed/wanted to propose some rfc but they
shouldn't .
I think we should be able to differentiate the voters manually this time.
But implementing those voting RFC rules before next time would be ideal.
-Hannes
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?Answering my own question; No, it doesn't.
http://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:doodle2#authentication-Hannes
I checked the source, if the permissions are set correctly, then the
required code change is minimal:
in the php-wiki/dokuwiki/lib/plugins/doodle/syntax.php file we have to
modify the render and castVote methods to check
$this->isAllowedToEditEntry($fullname) and thats it.--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.huof course the explicit group checking would be better, because
currently we have votes under rfc namespace where some users have
write access as they proposed/wanted to propose some rfc but they
shouldn't .I think we should be able to differentiate the voters manually this time.
But implementing those voting RFC rules before next time would be ideal.-Hannes
after some discussion on irc, we agreed that for a quick fix for the
wiki we should only allow voting for the following groups:
- phpcvs : this is a fake group, every @php.net user is part of it.
- voting: this group isn't exists yet AFAIK, we should add everybody
to this who are allowed to vote, bu don't have svn account.
my patch is on gist: https://gist.github.com/1076035
if you think its fine, it could be commited, I don't have karma for the wiki.
ps: I also allowed the wiki admins to access the voting features just in case.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?Answering my own question; No, it doesn't.
http://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:doodle2#authentication-Hannes
I checked the source, if the permissions are set correctly, then the
required code change is minimal:
in the php-wiki/dokuwiki/lib/plugins/doodle/syntax.php file we have to
modify the render and castVote methods to check
$this->isAllowedToEditEntry($fullname) and thats it.--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.huof course the explicit group checking would be better, because
currently we have votes under rfc namespace where some users have
write access as they proposed/wanted to propose some rfc but they
shouldn't .I think we should be able to differentiate the voters manually this time.
But implementing those voting RFC rules before next time would be ideal.-Hannes
after some discussion on irc, we agreed that for a quick fix for the
wiki we should only allow voting for the following groups:
- phpcvs : this is a fake group, every @php.net user is part of it.
- voting: this group isn't exists yet AFAIK, we should add everybody
to this who are allowed to vote, bu don't have svn account.my patch is on gist: https://gist.github.com/1076035
if you think its fine, it could be commited, I don't have karma for the wiki.ps: I also allowed the wiki admins to access the voting features just in case.
Greetings,
I didn't test it, but made the commit. What can go wrong? :) Also, I'm not sure
how often the wiki pulls from SVN.
And people have expressed different interpretations of the voting RFC regarding
"who can vote" so I suspect this overall topic will persist.... However, the above
changes have been made that hopefully fixes this bug.
Regards,
Philip
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 1:00 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:07 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 12:03, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:It is very hard to detect which "php group" a person belongs to, our
karma system doesn't work like that.We can easily detect if an account is an php.net SVN account though.
And the wiki can tell you if a person has write access to that specific page.Most external users have assigned "write" groups, "qa", "rfc", "web".
These are the people who have requested access to these areas.I was under the impression the vote plugin respected the write
permission acl to that page, so a user would need to have write karma
to that namespace to be able to vote.
Does it have no builtin functionality like that?Answering my own question; No, it doesn't.
http://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:doodle2#authentication-Hannes
I checked the source, if the permissions are set correctly, then the
required code change is minimal:
in the php-wiki/dokuwiki/lib/plugins/doodle/syntax.php file we have to
modify the render and castVote methods to check
$this->isAllowedToEditEntry($fullname) and thats it.--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.huof course the explicit group checking would be better, because
currently we have votes under rfc namespace where some users have
write access as they proposed/wanted to propose some rfc but they
shouldn't .I think we should be able to differentiate the voters manually this time.
But implementing those voting RFC rules before next time would be ideal.-Hannes
after some discussion on irc, we agreed that for a quick fix for the
wiki we should only allow voting for the following groups:
- phpcvs : this is a fake group, every @php.net user is part of it.
- voting: this group isn't exists yet AFAIK, we should add everybody
to this who are allowed to vote, bu don't have svn account.my patch is on gist: https://gist.github.com/1076035
if you think its fine, it could be commited, I don't have karma for the wiki.ps: I also allowed the wiki admins to access the voting features just in case.
Greetings,
I didn't test it, but made the commit. What can go wrong? :) Also, I'm not sure
how often the wiki pulls from SVN.And people have expressed different interpretations of the voting RFC regarding
"who can vote" so I suspect this overall topic will persist.... However, the above
changes have been made that hopefully fixes this bug.
It has updated by now atleast.
The current vote still needs to be reviewed manually anyway, so I
really don't understand the need for a quick hack at this time.
Cooperating with the plugin authors on how to implement better checks
there would imo make much more sense.
-Hannes
Hi!
The current vote still needs to be reviewed manually anyway, so I
really don't understand the need for a quick hack at this time.
Cooperating with the plugin authors on how to implement better checks
there would imo make much more sense.
Is there some API function that allows to see if given username does it
have SVN auth? If we have one, we could add check using it to render()
maybe for now.
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227
Hi!
The current vote still needs to be reviewed manually anyway, so I
really don't understand the need for a quick hack at this time.
Cooperating with the plugin authors on how to implement better checks
there would imo make much more sense.Is there some API function that allows to see if given username does it have
SVN auth? If we have one, we could add check using it to render() maybe for
now.
Yes, there's one at master.php.net/fetch/user.php that could be used
if anyone knows the value of the token to pass along.
--
Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect
SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/
(408)454-6900 ext. 227
Hi!
The current vote still needs to be reviewed manually anyway, so I
really don't understand the need for a quick hack at this time.
Cooperating with the plugin authors on how to implement better checks
there would imo make much more sense.Is there some API function that allows to see if given username does it have
SVN auth? If we have one, we could add check using it to render() maybe for
now.Yes, there's one at master.php.net/fetch/user.php that could be used
if anyone knows the value of the token to pass along.
the wiki does this already, this is why you can log in with your svn
credentials.
and when you log in with your svn credentials, the wiki will populate
your groups with phpcvs.
if you check my modifications, I added a check to the plugin to only
allow voting if one has either the phpcvs or voting or admin wiki
group.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
Hi!
The current vote still needs to be reviewed manually anyway, so I
really don't understand the need for a quick hack at this time.
Cooperating with the plugin authors on how to implement better checks
there would imo make much more sense.Is there some API function that allows to see if given username does it have
SVN auth? If we have one, we could add check using it to render() maybe for
now.Yes, there's one at master.php.net/fetch/user.php that could be used
if anyone knows the value of the token to pass along.the wiki does this already, this is why you can log in with your svn
credentials.
and when you log in with your svn credentials, the wiki will populate
your groups with phpcvs.
if you check my modifications, I added a check to the plugin to only
allow voting if one has either the phpcvs or voting or admin wiki
group.
Stas means when we print who has voted, to only print votes by people
in that group so you won't need to manually filter out
not-allowed-to-vote votes.
-Hannes
Stas means when we print who has voted, to only print votes by people
in that group so you won't need to manually filter out
not-allowed-to-vote votes.-Hannes
I see.
if you only need the @php.net usernames, you can use the
https://master.php.net/fetch/allusers.php api with the proper token,
or https://bugs.php.net/js/userlisting.php without it.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
Stas means when we print who has voted, to only print votes by people
in that group so you won't need to manually filter out
not-allowed-to-vote votes.-Hannes
I see.
if you only need the @php.net usernames, you can use the
https://master.php.net/fetch/allusers.php api with the proper token,
or https://bugs.php.net/js/userlisting.php without it.
Or just ask the internal wiki api if the username is in the phpcvs/voted group.
No need to make it complicated.
The whole idea of this sort of workaround is however very silly to me.
-Hannes
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
Stas means when we print who has voted, to only print votes by people
in that group so you won't need to manually filter out
not-allowed-to-vote votes.-Hannes
I see.
if you only need the @php.net usernames, you can use the
https://master.php.net/fetch/allusers.php api with the proper token,
or https://bugs.php.net/js/userlisting.php without it.Or just ask the internal wiki api if the username is in the phpcvs/voted group.
No need to make it complicated.
oh, I didn't though of that, as this is how my patch works (albeit
only for the new votes, but still). :)
The whole idea of this sort of workaround is however very silly to me.
thanks for sharing, this kind of comments which keeps me contributing ;)
ps:
"The current vote still needs to be reviewed manually anyway, so I
really don't understand the need for a quick hack at this time.
Cooperating with the plugin authors on how to implement better checks
there would imo make much more sense."
I did this because it seems that some people use the current situation
(that technically anybody can vote) as a cannon fodder for some
personal arguments.
the patch is as clean as it can be, and I asked you and others to
review it before applying.
of course the plugin author could do a better job, feel free to revert
mine if we ever got that.
--
Ferenc Kovács
@Tyr43l - http://tyrael.hu
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:Stas means when we print who has voted, to only print votes by people
in that group so you won't need to manually filter out
not-allowed-to-vote votes.-Hannes
I see.
if you only need the @php.net usernames, you can use the
https://master.php.net/fetch/allusers.php api with the proper token,
or https://bugs.php.net/js/userlisting.php without it.Or just ask the internal wiki api if the username is in the phpcvs/voted group.
No need to make it complicated.oh, I didn't though of that, as this is how my patch works (albeit
only for the new votes, but still). :)The whole idea of this sort of workaround is however very silly to me.
thanks for sharing, this kind of comments which keeps me contributing ;)
I don't think you are understanding the point here.
There are currently bucketloads of registered votes for the php54
feature list which "should not be there".
The idea Stas proposed of leaving the votes untouched and just hide
those specific votes during rendering of the vote results is very
silly to me.
Manually summerizing the votes like has been done in the past on many
RFCs into "with karma" and "without" results would make much more
sense to me, especially since there are so many registered votes
already.
It was in no remotely close way anything at all related to the patch
you wrote and was committed earlier.
-Hannes
hi Hannes,
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:09 PM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
Stas means when we print who has voted, to only print votes by people
in that group so you won't need to manually filter out
not-allowed-to-vote votes.-Hannes
I see.
if you only need the @php.net usernames, you can use the
https://master.php.net/fetch/allusers.php api with the proper token,
or https://bugs.php.net/js/userlisting.php without it.Or just ask the internal wiki api if the username is in the phpcvs/voted group.
No need to make it complicated.The whole idea of this sort of workaround is however very silly to me.
What's wrong with such solutions until we have more time to contribute
a clean patch to the plugin to support ACLs nicely? If you have
anything better to propose and to apply now and here, please tell it.
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:Hi!
Hi,
if somebody wonders why do we have those french guys registering on the
wiki:http://blog.mageekbox.net/?post/2011/07/10/La-r%C3%A9volution-est-en-marche-%21
the author thought that anybody can vote who has wiki account, but
that is corrected now.
however judging from the responses and the number of registrations I
think we should publish something to the php.net frontpage about the
accepted voting RFC, and maybe rephrase or clean up the who can vote
part.for example can someone with svn account and 1 commit vote?
I'd say for core features everybody with write access to the core, but then
again, not sure about how to formalize that. Note that vote isn't meant to
be the decision. At least I think it wasn't and shouldn't mean that. It
should be a measure of if there's a consensus about certain thing or not.As for technical side, I don't know enough about how the auth system works
to see if we can enforce it technically. If somebody with this
knowledge is willing to help, please ping me and we can discuss how to
implement this in docuwiki.I thought I had pointed this out already.
AFAICT anyone with wiki account can vote. And anyone can get wiki account.
People with wiki accounts however cannot modify any content because we
have write restrictions on everything, so before this vote plugin came
along a wiki account was utterly useless without an admin explicitly
giving write karma.Yes, hence why I said we have to fix that in the moodle plugin. But
who can vote is clearly define. Now, I'd to ask wiki admins to do not
accept random accounts for the fun to accept them. Thanks.
There is no "accept an account". Thanks.
Creating an account in the wiki, creates an account.
Like I said, the user doesn't have write access to anything unless
someone explicitly gives him write access (usually to /rfc, or /web).
That generally happens when the account register reads the register
page and send an email to this list and explains why he needs an
account.
-Hannes
On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Hannes Magnusson
hannes.magnusson@gmail.com wrote:
There is no "accept an account". Thanks.
Creating an account in the wiki, creates an account.
Like I said, the user doesn't have write access to anything unless
someone explicitly gives him write access (usually to /rfc, or /web).
That generally happens when the account register reads the register
page and send an email to this list and explains why he needs an
account.
I mean it in general. And read my other replies for the todos, thanks.
--
Pierre
@pierrejoye | http://blog.thepimp.net | http://www.libgd.org
Hello !
Hi,
if somebody wonders why do we have those french guys registering on the wiki:
http://blog.mageekbox.net/?post/2011/07/10/La-r%C3%A9volution-est-en-marche-%21the author thought that anybody can vote who has wiki account, but
that is corrected now.
All my apologizes for this error :/.
however judging from the responses and the number of registrations I
think we should publish something to the php.net frontpage about the
accepted voting RFC, and maybe rephrase or clean up the who can vote
part.for example can someone with svn account and 1 commit vote?
even if it's a sole test or one-liner doc fix?
even if it was 10 years ago?
how will the selection of the representatives work?
do we have some limitations for the representatives? (for example
there can be only N number of reps any given time, etc.)
It's difficult to answer to these questions.
I think that "mentorship" can be a good solution in this case.