Charlie, Good to hear. Since you question was answered with "Tiddly locking" could you point to that as a solution for future readers in this thread ?
Tones On Monday, 6 September 2021 at 15:15:49 UTC+10 cj.v...@gmail.com wrote: > G'day Tones, > > I've got editing and delete of important tiddlers blocked via tiddler > locking. That's easy and good. > > The only thing I have to handle, even if 99% unlikely, is certain tiddlers > getting overwritten by any tech-savvy (well, TiddlyWiki-savvy) individual. > > Since that can't really be prevented, then a scheduled process to compare > files should be pretty easy (for all of these TiddlyWiki instances on > node.js) Just a matter of comparing "end-user" tiddlers to > "architecture/infrastructure/farm/admin/etc .) tiddlers, and having the > process delete anything that shouldn't exist in end-users' tiddler folders. > > Maybe another little process to raise the redflag as soon as there's a > blip. > > I am avoiding plugins and staying pure node.js and tiddlywiki for as much > as I can, an exercise to really get a good feel for how TiddlyWiki works on > node.js. For the near future. > > All of these goodies you mention in my back-pocket for now. Thanks ! > On Monday, September 6, 2021 at 1:03:27 AM UTC-3 TW Tones wrote: > >> Charlie, >> >> A few ideas; >> >> One way would be to stash a copy away, perhaps inside a JSON tiddler, >> similar to Mohammad's trash plugin but just on editing. This kind of >> solution can intercept User interface edit/delete however batch processes >> can by pass this. >> >> Some solutions like noteself to keep all versions, so you could restore >> from there, after running an automated are tiddlers missing check, perhaps >> before saving. >> >> You could also modify the delete button to refuse to delete if a tiddler >> contains a field delete-inhibit=yes or just exists. I have already made an >> alternate edit button which honors edit-inhibit and just hide the original >> edit behind the more button. On some wikis we may want to hide the more >> button so they can not access (directly) the buttons we do not want them to >> use and only provide them alternatives, we want them to use. When the cant >> edit or delete you can actually just hide that alternative button. >> >> Another is to take a set of tiddlers, and move them into a plugin, delete >> the tiddler version. They then become shadows, and if edited you simply >> delete the tiddler to return to the shadow copy. The only way to delete the >> shadows is to delete the plugin itself, so the user needs to undertake >> additional steps. This can avoid batch processes deleting the tiddlers. >> >> I have felt that for some time introducing delete-inhibit and >> edit-inhibit fields/flags on at least some tiddlers would be a helpful >> option. For example the plugin mentioned in the last paragraph. >> >> I am yet to work out how but I believe the new eventCatcher widget or the >> existing LinkCatcherWidget or ActionConfirmWidget can help here. >> >> One idea would be trapping using the action confirm widget on the delete >> step, and on confirmation make a backup copy of the tiddler. >> >> Tones >> >> On Monday, 6 September 2021 at 11:01:25 UTC+10 cj.v...@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> Trying to achieve a robust architecture for a farm of node.js >>> TiddlyWikis that together form a distributed database, with end-user level >>> (and private) TiddlyWikis that have certain types of tiddlers that are >>> automagically shared (and the rest private), and system-level TiddlyWikis >>> that tie all of the architecture together along with user-interface stuff, >>> etc. etc. etc. >>> >>> Sure, not very likely end-user folk could muck things up, but a robust >>> system really should never allow an end-user to break their TiddlyWiki (in >>> this farm idea of mine) by somehow replacing any key component tiddler. >>> >>> No worries. I'll train my thoughts on obfuscation, risk-mitigation >>> design/strategies, and automated monitoring/repairing processes. >>> >>> All part of a big idea that ties together, in part: >>> >>> - A brewing idea: TiddlyWiki on node.js: check for changes >>> <https://groups.google.com/g/tiddlywiki/c/GMagvXTOxLI/m/POV20R69AwAJ> >>> - More playing around with TiddlyWiki on node.js: the makings of a >>> distributed database >>> <https://groups.google.com/g/tiddlywiki/c/OuYwkSgPBDo/m/egsk9fhoAwAJ> >>> >>> On Sunday, September 5, 2021 at 8:18:19 PM UTC-3 PMario wrote: >>> >>>> On Sunday, September 5, 2021 at 8:36:26 PM UTC+2 cj.v...@gmail.com >>>> wrote: >>>> ... >>>> >>>>> Is there an easy way to protect such a tiddler? >>>>> >>>> >>>> No. In TW you can overwrite every core tiddler if you like. So there is >>>> no way to write-protect a tiddler. >>>> What do you want to achieve? >>>> -m >>>> >>>> >>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/a1d7f049-19f8-4035-bf97-b4bee2f93cfcn%40googlegroups.com.
