David Gerard wrote:
Magnus Manske wrote:
Setting a version as stable is currently not
logged; this isn't a
technical problem, but sheer lazyness on my part.
There is a problem with templates; even a stable version will use new
templates. I do not have a neat soultion for that, except generally
limiting write access to templates. However, misinformation through a
template will be hard to achieve anyway, compared to directly editing
article; also, template changes will be noticed rather quickly.
Would a neat solution be to attach a list of the revision IDs of all
templates in the stable version, so that when the page is called up it
calls up those versions of the templates? Or is this harder than it sounds?
So, a new table to store all revision numbers of the templates used in
the stable article version.
And the templates used in *these*, too. (And so on.)
And tell the parser to use these. (What if one of these revisions was
deleted? Use the "nearest"?)
And all that from within an extension.
Ask Erik Moeller about WikiData and "revision consistency hell" ;-)
Don't get me wrong, this is possible, no doubt; but I'm still struggling
with the logging system (my attempt is half-broken, could someone take a
look there?). IMHO templates (in this context) are a problem, but a very
minor one, compared to what the feature achieves otherwise with very
little mess.
If templates turn out to be a big problem later, we can just say (globally):
* If showing a stable version, use the stable (in contrast to the
latest) template version, if such is set (latest remains fallback)
That would minimize messing with the system while giving high-quality
results, with a minimum of special cases.
Magnus