Thread: Re: [HACKERS] Developer's Wiki

> Two points I'm not clear about on this thread though:
>
> 1. Authorized user: is that someone with an account, or
> someone who has been authorized by someone else?

IIRC, the idea was "someone with an account". Basically you add a (very
very small) hurdle so you only get the people who actually *care* to
write things. But if you do care, it's not a lot of work. You also get
traceability, so you can talk to whomever wrote a certain thing.

I don't see any gain in having someone specifically authorize who can
write to it.

//Magnus

Magnus Hagander wrote:
>> Two points I'm not clear about on this thread though:
>>
>> 1. Authorized user: is that someone with an account, or
>> someone who has been authorized by someone else?
>
> IIRC, the idea was "someone with an account". Basically you add a (very
> very small) hurdle so you only get the people who actually *care* to
> write things. But if you do care, it's not a lot of work. You also get
> traceability, so you can talk to whomever wrote a certain thing.
>
> I don't see any gain in having someone specifically authorize who can
> write to it.

Yeah I would agree. My idea was just that people would actually create
an account and be email confirmed.

Joshua D. Drake


>
> //Magnus
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 6: explain analyze is your friend
>


--

    === The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
    Providing the most comprehensive  PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
              http://www.commandprompt.com/