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(a)wikimedia.org>rg>:
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(a)lists.wikimedia.org
http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiquality-l