Iv Ray wrote: > Alex schrieb: >> MediaWiki is primarily developed for sites like those operated by >> Wikimedia and Wikia, where either the whole site is viewable, or almost >> none of it is. > > I understand that, per my initial post. > >> As far as I know, there is no effort, besides any >> development work on the various existing extensions, that is working >> toward such restrictions. > > Right, I just wonder why so many extensions are developed, which, in > fact, do not provide what they are written for. If all these people > would combine their effort to fix MediaWiki, a more acceptable result > might come out of it.
Because half-fixes are easier than a full one? If you provided a full fix (without breaking anything), it would be accepted, and new code would follow that design. Missing it, each point accessing to the data don't have anything to fix. Also, some of the gaps have been closed (such as addtion of $wgNonIncludableNamespaces). Duesentrieb's extension did a good job limiting access, but for perfomance problems, core was changed in a breaking it. > There are items, which management, for instance, does not want available > to everyone, while in preparation. It is not about things being secret. Is it so important that nothing can be discovered, then? Getting a piece of text you weren't supposed to read on the search summary isn't so bad if that is going to be published in a few days. _______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
