Fossil SCM
Permit forum users to edit posts after admin has edited them
539e5365b4ffeb9…
· opened 3 years, 1 month ago
- Type
- Feature_Request
- Priority
- Immediate
- Severity
- Minor
- Resolution
- Open
- Subsystem
- —
- Created
- March 11, 2023 9:44 a.m.
Once an admin edits a forum post, the original (non-admin) owner of that post becomes unable to apply further edits because the latest version is not owned by them. One can fairly argue that that's the correct behavior, but it can also come as a surprise to both users and admins (in practice, most admin edits are to add block formatting to code snippets, as opposed to editing poorly-mannered verbiage).
Martin G. proposed a middle ground: permit a user to edit a post of their own if an admin has edited it, but place that edit into the moderation queue regardless of the user's moderation status.
Whether or not the moderation-queue approach would best be applied to all edits after the admin's edit, or just to the first one, is unclear. What we don't want is users undoing admin edits (except to improve upon them), but any such editing would likely be noticed by someone and get the user knocked down to requiring moderation, or even disabled.
The full range of corner cases for this is not yet clear. One is: if an admin user makes an edit, then loses admin rights, it's then not possible to say "an admin edited this other person's post." What we can see, though, is that someone other than the OP edited it, and the only use case allowing that is an admin edit.
Comments (3)
Once an admin edits a forum post, the original (non-admin) owner of that post becomes unable to apply further edits because the latest version is not owned by them. One can fairly argue that that's the correct behavior, but it can also come as a surprise to both users and admins (in practice, most admin edits are to add block formatting to code snippets, as opposed to editing poorly-mannered verbiage).
Martin G. proposed a middle ground: permit a user to edit a post of their own if an admin has edited it, but place that edit into the moderation queue regardless of the user's moderation status.
Whether or not the moderation-queue approach would best be applied to all edits after the admin's edit, or just to the first one, is unclear. What we don't want is users undoing admin edits (except to improve upon them), but any such editing would likely be noticed by someone and get the user knocked down to requiring moderation, or even disabled.
The full range of corner cases for this is not yet clear. One is: if an admin user makes an edit, then loses admin rights, it's then not possible to say "an admin edited this other person's post." What we can see, though, is that someone other than the OP edited it, and the only use case allowing that is an admin edit.
A potential unrelated bug: the email address in the ticket was changed, perhaps (not certain) between Preview and Post. This edit is to change that address back to the which was manually entered while writing the ticket.
Regarding the above comment:
What we can see, though, is that someone other than the OP edited it, and the only use case allowing that is an admin edit.
"Admin edit" might mean that the post was edited by someone on their own local clone and then pushed into the "central" forum.
The fossil-scm.org forum does not permit most folks to push into the forum, but that's a local policy decision. In projects, like althttpd and pikchr, where the code and forum are in the same repo, anyone with checkin access can effectively admin-edit forum posts in their local copy then push the changes across.