--- Comment #11 from Dan Garry <> ---
(In reply to comment #8)
> That's not a bug, it was very much a feature of the tool as originally
> designed
> and used, I think it's legitimate to do this change but that's a different
> question. This is a change in state for very legitimate reasons, but not a
> bugfix.

Sure, maybe it was a feature. However, from the perspective of a
non-oversighter, the only effect it had was to not pique their curiosity about
what was previously there. The actual use case of oversight, namely "there is
public information here which I want to remove from public view", is still
satisfied irrespective of whether the placeholder is there or not, as the old
oversighted edits are being migrated to edits that are fully suppressed.
Therefore I'm not terribly concerned about whether that placeholder is there
(i.e. edits are migrated to the revision table) or not (i.e. the edits are
migrated to the archive table); the core use case, full suppression, is still

I think there's no harm in taking this a little slower and sending out some
communications first to the oversighters and stewards and reassuring them that
stuff that was nonpublic will not be made public by this change. I'll try to
sort that communication out.

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list

Reply via email to