The thought of using two wiki's did occur to me and I considered doing it the same way as the various languages do (i.e. [[en.PageTitle]] for the english version versus [[fr.PageTitle]] for ther french version) and do something like [[priv.PageTitle]] and [[publ.PageTitle]] but I have no experiance doing various language wiki so the whole thing would be new to me. The biggest concern/goal is for the user's experiance to be simple and not have them need to keep track of what is where.
What woudl be geat is if there is an extension that can force an update to a second wiki such that only the protected wiki would user editable and then the extention tag could be dropped in to the article to push updates to the public wiki. That would be really slick! --- Does that exist? If not...can we (the group) make it? I'll help :-) I just don't know where to start - lol
- Rich (revansx)
---- Jim Wilson wilson.jim.r@gmail.com wrote:
The safest (easiest?) way I can think of is to have a separate wiki that is decidedly public. Meaning publicly viewable (you can of course lock down editorship however you want).
Locking down read access to certain pages is a tough problem not solvable with a vanilla install alone - it takes extensions to do it. There may be extensions out there that can help you, but I'm not sure.
-- Jim R. Wilson (jimbojw)
On 5/29/07, revansx@cox.net revansx@cox.net wrote:
Dear mediawiki admin experts,
I have a configuration goal for my installation of mediawiki that might technically only be a web-server related modification, but I am convinced that the solution (if it is even possible) will requires the advanced insights of this group of experts. Here's the situation: I have set-up a mediawiki (1.6.10) on a dedicated company server (Red Hat, Apache 2.0.52) which uniformly (www and intranet) limits browser accessibility to users who have a company username and password which they are required to provide to the browser in order to view the wiki articles. wiki user-accounts for authoring are handled by the LDAP module. This part all works great. --- The problem is --- that I am now being asked if it is possible to make certain pages "publicly" accessible and not protected behind a secure browser authentication against the company's domain (after we've gone to such excellent lengths to protect all of the content!!!) I am being asked if specific articles and/or all of the articles in certain namespace can be made to be an exception to our global restrictions on who can "see" the articles. A specific example is the "Main Page" and any of the User's pages. So, does anyone know how to configure a mediawiki such that "some" pages require secure browser authentication even just to see them? If so, the ideal solution would behave such that new pages are created inaccessible from the public by default. --- sincerest thanks all. - Rich (revansx)
MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
MediaWiki-l mailing list MediaWiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-l
revansx@cox.net wrote:
I have no experiance doing various language wiki so the whole thing would be new to me.
It's not hard - just follow the instructions in Manual:Wiki Family on the mediawiki web site.
The biggest concern/goal is for the user's experiance to be simple and not have them need to keep track of what is where.
Use two simple but different domain names and use htaccess or virtual host to redirect to the appropriate wiki.
What woudl be geat is if there is an extension that can force an update to a second wiki such that only the protected wiki would user editable and then the extention tag could be dropped in to the article to push updates to the public wiki. That would be really slick!
I thought that this kind of approach could be used instead of fancy protection schemes for wikis that want to have a protected production system and an editable development version (e.g. wiki as instruction manual). The difference is what gets seen rather than what gets edited/pushed.
can we (the group) make it?
Don't refer to yourself as "we" :) Yes, you can.
Mike
mediawiki-l@lists.wikimedia.org