https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13751
--- Comment #8 from Nemo_bis <federicol...@tiscali.it> 2010-11-30 21:26:57 UTC --- (In reply to comment #7) > We don't want the software hardcoded to autoreview edits just because someone > has 'rollback'. 'rollback' and 'autoreview' should be kept separate rights. That's exactly what we're asking, because we don't want to add "autoreview" to all rollbackers. > Having one right do part of what another right does like this is usually bad > design and historically always backfires later on. I really don't understand this. "Autoreview" is about the flag of a new revision the user creates when he edits the page, isn't it? And according to http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs#User_rights those revisions (the page says "edits", I suppose it's a typo) are marked as sighted. But when you use rollback you restore the most recent revision apart from the rollbacked one[s]; currently, the "new" revision, identical to the restored one, is not flagged, but even if you had "autoreview" or "autoreview on rollback" (as you propose) that revision would be only "sighted", wouldn't it? And why should a "sighted" recent version suddenly become unflagged, or even a "good" recent revision suddenly become only "sighted"? What has changed after the rollback? Why should e.g. rollbacked vandalism require additional verification of the retored revisions? -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
