--- Comment #8 from Krinkle <> ---
From Code Review:

(Legoktm        Jan 3 10:20)
> I always viewed the 'move' permission as an extension of the 'edit' 
> permission and saw this as a feature instead of a bug.

(Jackmcbarn        Jan 3 16:53)
> If you didn't want a page to be moved, you'd just move-protect it along with 
> it (which happens by default). If we don't want this to work, then the 
> software shouldn't allow move-protection to be set to a lower level than 
> edit-protection at all.

There's two issues with this:

1) All existing protections.

2) What would be an example use case where one needs to prevent editing by
certain users, but are totally fine with them renaming the page? It seems like
a more impactful action, not less.

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

Reply via email to