Someone asked [1] if the log could be formatted in reverse order. I've implemented this in the CheckUser extension, but I've no idea what the done thing is when coaxing people to synchronise from the extensions module.
Anyway, done that.
Rob Church
[1] => http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2005-December/033308.html
2006/1/2, Rob Church <robchur(at)gmail.com>:
Someone asked [1] if the log could be formatted in reverse order. I've implemented this in the CheckUser extension, but I've no idea what the done thing is when coaxing people to synchronise from the extensions module.
Anyway, done that.
I missed the last discussion you linked, so let me give my quick comment here.
The log for CheckUser is awful right now. Here's an example of three entries (IPs and usernames blanked):
18:30, 30 gru 2005 XXX got IPs for ZZZ 18:32, 30 gru 2005 XXX got edits for 127.0.0.1 20:15, December 30, 2005 YYY got edits for 127.0.0.1
First of all, there's no information on the project where the check was done.
Secondly, the dates are in the local format of the wiki on which the check was done.
Third, you can't search the log.
Well, that's it. So... Could any developer take care of this, or should I submit a bug to bugzilla?
-- Pozdrawiam, Dariusz "Datrio" Siedlecki
I envision a minor interface and logging overhaul. Not too difficult either. Searchable logs might take a bit more work, but not a lot.
I'm up for it.
Rob Church
On 02/01/06, Dariusz Siedlecki datrio@gmail.com wrote:
2006/1/2, Rob Church <robchur(at)gmail.com>:
Someone asked [1] if the log could be formatted in reverse order. I've implemented this in the CheckUser extension, but I've no idea what the done thing is when coaxing people to synchronise from the extensions module.
Anyway, done that.
I missed the last discussion you linked, so let me give my quick comment here.
The log for CheckUser is awful right now. Here's an example of three entries (IPs and usernames blanked):
18:30, 30 gru 2005 XXX got IPs for ZZZ 18:32, 30 gru 2005 XXX got edits for 127.0.0.1 20:15, December 30, 2005 YYY got edits for 127.0.0.1
First of all, there's no information on the project where the check was done.
Secondly, the dates are in the local format of the wiki on which the check was done.
Third, you can't search the log.
Well, that's it. So... Could any developer take care of this, or should I submit a bug to bugzilla?
-- Pozdrawiam, Dariusz "Datrio" Siedlecki _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Is there any reason why this shouldn't log to the local log with the IP addresses munged?
Bung it in the logging table and just not show it on the ordinary Special:Log pages, perhaps?
Rob Church
On 02/01/06, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason avarab@gmail.com wrote:
Is there any reason why this shouldn't log to the local log with the IP addresses munged?
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
Is there any reason why this shouldn't log to the local log with the IP addresses munged?
Err. Yes, yes there is. Read, well, every single bloody "oh, but please, why not make the CheckUser logs public?!? OK, in obfuscated form, then? Why not? Umm!?" discussion spread over meta, foundation-l, etc. for the past few months for an at-length treatise, but, essentially: that checks are carried out is privileged information. There is nothing that can be logged (even down to "User XYZ made <number> CheckUser checks on <date>") that doesn't undermine the usefulness of CheckUser in both technical and (especially) sociological senses. Further, logging with IP addresses munged would certainly not be releasable information under the privacy policy, so it would serve no point. Local logging could work, I suppose, but would make it more complicated to follow the actions of one CheckUser user.
OTOH, using the proper standard logging facility but in a shared manner across all wikis, with restrictable fields (wiki, time frame, user, IP range matching, CheckUser user, etc.) would be ideal. But quite a lot of work, I'd imagine.
Yours, - -- James D. Forrester Wikimedia : [[W:en:User:Jdforrester|James F.]] E-Mail : james@jdforrester.org IM (MSN) : jamesdforrester@hotmail.com
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org