https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22293

--- Comment #3 from SoWhy <a...@sowhy.de> 2010-01-28 12:35:11 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> (In reply to comment #0)
> > * 23:59, 31 December 2099 <Admin> (talk | contribs | block) changed 
> > protection
> > settings for <Article> [set edit=autoconfirmed from edit=all] (expires 
> > 23:59, 1
> > January 2100 (UTC)) [set move=autoconfirmed from move=all] (expires 23:59, 1
> > January  (UTC)) ‎ (<Reason>)  (hist | change)
> 
> This format is a little weird -- it's interleaving the old and new values. It
> makes the log entires hard to read. I think this might be a bit too much
> information for the average user. Might be useful in the API though.

Well, it was only an example. It could also look like this: 

* 23:59, 31 December 2099 <Admin> (talk | contribs | block) changed protection
settings for <Article> [edit=autoconfirmed] (expires 23:59, 1 January 2100
(UTC)) [move=autoconfirmed] (expires 23:59, 1 January  (UTC)) ‎ (<Reason>) 
(hist | change) Previous settings: edit=all, move=all.

The point is, that with previous entries (and many such entries), you need to
start calculating whether the protection was a change or a new protection. When
blocking for example, the system instead uses "<Admin> blocked <User>" for a
new block but "<Admin> changed block settings for <User>" if the new block just
modifies the old one. 

Regards
SoWhy

-- 
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 watching all bug changes.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to