We are including mediawiki application into one existing site. for this we made one wrapper to check the authenticity of the user from existing site, We want to allow only two types of users;- 1. which are present into the mediawiki database 2. which are authentic according to our wrapper but new to mediawiki database problem is, if someone directly gives mediawiki path to the browser then

can easily click " create account" and login into mediawiki. How we prevent this anonymous user to login into mediawiki.

On 1/10/08, amuenzeb(a)rockwellcollins.com <amuenzeb(a)rockwellcollins.com > wrote: > > mediawiki-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org schrieb am 10.01.2008

> > > We wish to restrict anonymous views to our mediawiki installation.

> > unauthorized user is to be redirected to a particular page. This

> > may not be a wiki page. > > > > Can we do this using LocalSettings.php? > > $wgGroupPermissions['*' ]['read'] = false; > $wgGroupPermissions['user' ]['read'] = true; > > prevents anonymous users from reading. You can exclude some pages

_______________________________________________ MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l

How to get a more light DATA with WP by eliminating a ton of version of revision that WP keeps in the tables ?

TD> Well, there's /maintenance/..., but I don't know if anyone's been TD> keeping it up-to-date with changes to the rest of the code (some TD> of the maintenance scripts are quite out-of-date, I believe). You TD> could back everything up and try it and see what happens. But things might look cool but a month later you find out you have now embedded some wrinkle into your database, who knows. That's the problem with the maintenance directory. Programs are left lying there like old cigarette butts in an ashtray. Actually more like old medicine in an open cabinet where we kids are near. http://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12384 I mean it's not like we found the code on some 3rd party sidewalk. It it right there in the official distribution. Often they bear hints inside them that they are just what we want to do some job. The authors must have some inner urge to share them with us, otherwise they wouldn't be in the maintenance directory in the standard distribution. The must be eager for bug reports about what happens when we run them, which me might, upon guessing what the program will due despite lack of documentation, comments, etc.

I think this solution can work, can you suggest that how to make group for particular users. as i understood that in given example you mention the group name