On 12/1/07, werdna@svn.wikimedia.org werdna@svn.wikimedia.org wrote:

Revision: 28007 Author: werdna Date: 2007-12-01 09:08:43 +0000 (Sat, 01 Dec 2007)

Log Message:

• (bug 11346) Prevent users who cannot edit a page from changing its restrictions.

This kind of hard-coded merging of restrictions makes me uneasy. What if someone wants to have a protection level where no one at all can edit the page, without explicitly unprotecting? Then no one could ever unprotect it . . . In general, I like to see "edit" mean "edit", not "edit and also unprotect, if you have the unprotect right". But maybe that's just me.

A cleaner way to do this, if protection levels higher than sysop are desired, is to explicitly have different levels of the 'protect' permission. This is possibly most suitable for an extension.