Well, you can skip the comparison when using the rollback-tools. With manual reverts, the usual procedure could apply. Otherwise, I think this is a good idea, although this brings me to a question that came up when testing with templates:
It seems that templates are not stored with a stable version anymore? Is that correct, Aaron? Because if they are or will be again in the future, this leads to a problem with automatic reverts.
Bye,
Philipp
2007/10/5, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org:
Of all the issues identified so far, reverts strike me as the most significant. You revert vandalism, you don't want to have to re-apply sighting. This happens right now both on manual and automatic reverts.
We're already applying sighting automatically when the user is in the editor group and the current version is sighted. How about also doing so if the current version is not sighted, _and_ the text of the submission is identical to the text of the most recently sighted revision?
There would be some performance hit due to the comparison, but hopefully it wouldn't be too bad as it would only kick in on reverts. Is the basic idea sound? Is there a simpler way?
-- Toward Peace, Love & Progress: Erik
DISCLAIMER: This message does not represent an official position of the Wikimedia Foundation or its Board of Trustees.
Wikiquality-l mailing list Wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l