Oversight of file histories including images
Closed, DeclinedPublic

Description

Author: mcdevitd

Description:
Currently only page revisions may be oversighted. However, non-public personally
identifiable or libelous images (and other media) can only be deleted. We
recently ran into this problem and could not have hidden a file without
developer help.


Version: unspecified
Severity: enhancement

Details

Reference
bz8196
bzimport set Reference to bz8196.
bzimport added a subscriber: Unknown Object (MLST).
bzimport created this task.Dec 9 2006, 7:35 AM

simsgenius069 wrote:

Oversighting images sounds good to me.

simsgenius069 wrote:

(In reply to comment #1)

Oversighting images sounds good to me. I thought oversighting was just for articles?

robchur wrote:

Please don't post "yeah, +1" style comments on bug reports. Thank you.

aaron added a comment.Dec 21 2006, 5:05 AM

This may have to wait until live image storage is converted to FileStore format
like the archives. Otherwise the code would end up useless soon anyway.

Is it already possible to fix this error? I have come across a few occasions now already where there was no possibility to remove the images, although that would have been preferrable (either because of the image itself, either because of a summary during the upload, which is visible very much in the file history. Also in the log's, but that's another story I assume :) )

spacebirdy wrote:

*** Bug 12552 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

brion added a comment.Jan 9 2008, 1:28 AM

Right now the image has to be deleted manually from the deleted image archive directory. This isn't very difficult, but it's a slight pain.

In theory it ought not to be too difficult to set up an alternate archive and an interface to move them over.

brion added a comment.Jan 15 2008, 9:17 PM
  • Bug 12646 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

lar wrote:

Give that we have two dup bugs created, one by me (and honestly, I searched for bugs that might be dups of it and did not find this one) I tried to add some keywords to hopefully forestall more dups. (That didn't work, so I changed the summary to add "images", a natural thing for non devs to search on ) I suspect that there will be increasing interest in this. bug 12646 has some UI suggestions that might be useful for the implementer to review (in a nutshell, please make the UI as much like text revision oversight as possible, and maybe use the same permissions group to control who can use it)

aaron added a comment.Apr 2 2008, 5:56 AM

Done in 32278 - r32685.

vvv added a comment.Jul 9 2008, 3:41 PM

Actually, it isn't fixed. Please, check bug component before closing bug and don't confuse oversight extension with rev_deleted.

aaron added a comment.Jul 9 2008, 4:50 PM

This extension was only a temporary hack until the new deletion system was made.

This is done with revisiondelete. It should not be done in the temporary Oversight extension. Request to enable it would be a separate bug.

mike.lifeguard+bugs wrote:

(In reply to comment #13)

This is done with revisiondelete. It should not be done in the temporary
Oversight extension. Request to enable it would be a separate bug.

That would be bug 15029.

Add Comment