On 3/23/06, Tels <nospam-abuse(a)bloodgate.com> wrote:
Since this happens _after_ the export, it is
irrelevant. When you export
an article, you can only take into account edits done before that moment
in time :)
No no no.. what was advocated was looking at the history and removing
from consideration revisions which were reverted... i.e.
#Ver 5 Tim was a king of alaska in 1423. --Eric
#Ver 4 Tim was a king of alaska. --bob
#Ver 3 Tim was a king. --Cathy revert to version by bob.
#Ver 2 Tim was a king of alaska but he sucked. --joe
#Ver 1 Tim was a king. --bob
Of course this is a trivial simplification, but was Joe a contributor?
If you ignore versions which were reverted, he was not... but he
still could have been.
But otherwise, valid points. That
"contributor" stuff can easily get very
messy and unpractical.
Yep. Well there is always an easy out, just call all the editors
contributors.. couldn't be more simple. Doesn't always work well in
all media but it's okay a lot of the time.... Now only if we didn't
allow users to have usernames like "throbbing monster cock" ... though
you run into that set of problems even if you can figureout who the
real contributors are.