Author: gangleri
Description:
Dear friends,
The actions from [[meta:Special:Log]] which relate to other projects then [[meta:]] itself are *not* duplicated in the logs of the individual wiki's.
They should be added there because it is much easier to watch one logfile only then a bunch of them.
best regards reinhardt [[user:gangleri]]
See Also:
T5525: Cross-wiki watchlists
robchur wrote:
What sort of actions would be performed on meta that relate to the pages on
other wikis? The answer is none. The meta logs show deletions, user creations,
blocking, etc. on that wiki; the content of that wiki doesn't have much to do
with the content of the other wiki, more the administration. I don't see that
this is at all necessary.
rowan.collins wrote:
I imagine Reinhardt is referring to the "Bureaucrat" log -
[[meta:Special:Log/Rights]] - which on meta lists permissions changes carried
out centrally by "Stewards", such as granting/removing sysop status on small
wikis, or setting bot status.
It would indeed probably be a good idea to add an entry to the log of the target
wiki as well, although the lack of a single login system means the reference to
the user making the change might be kinda broken. The "user:anthere@metawiki"
style might half-work like it does on meta, but it might need a numeric user id,
not a name. In which case, perhaps there could be a pseudo-account called
"Remote Steward Action" or something (like "MediaWiki default" and "Conversion
script")?
After SUL finalisation, it might become a very realistic possibility to display global log entries among the local entries on each project's Special:Log pages.
Certainly, Rowan's 2005 concerns will become largely irrelevant - the only lingering questions, in my eyes, are how to visually distinguish the log entries as coming in from Meta, and how to implement such a thing from the DB/backend side.
Hi. This is already done for user renaming now. Can the same be done for at least userrights-interwiki uses?
Unless I'm missing something, it looks like the complexity and consequent priority of this task hasn't been evaluated since before SUL was fully implemented. Given that it's been open over 13 years would it be possible for someone to take a look again at how much work would be involved - and then just do it if it's a simple job.